FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 21013/07
Lyudmila Mikhaylovna YEGUPOVA against Ukraine
and 10 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5 June 2012 as a committee composed of:
	Mark Villiger, President,
	Karel Jungwiert,
	André Potocki, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on various dates,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants are Ukrainian nationals whose details are specified in the table attached below. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Ms Valeria Lutkovska and Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice.
On various dates (see the table below) the national courts ordered the State authorities to take certain actions or to pay various pecuniary amounts to the applicants. Those judgments became final, but the authorities delayed their enforcement.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained about the delayed enforcement of the judgments given in their favour. Some of them also raised other complaints.
THE LAW
1.  The Court considers that the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background.
2.  On various dates (see the table below) the Government submitted several unilateral declarations with a view to settling the applicants’ cases. By the declarations the Government acknowledged the excessive duration of the enforcement of the applicants’ judgments and undertook to enforce the judgments that were still subject to enforcement. They also offered to pay all the applicants various compensation sums (see the table below).
The Government invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and suggested that the declarations might be accepted by the Court as “any other reason” justifying the striking out of the cases of the Court’s list of cases, as referred to in Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
The compensation sums were to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, would be free of any taxes that might be applicable and would be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of settlement. They would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. This payment would constitute the final resolution of the cases.
In reply, the applicants agreed with the declarations, even though some of them doubted that the Government would comply with their terms.
In light of the above, the Court considers that the parties have actually reached a friendly settlement in respect of these parts of the applications. Therefore, they should be struck out of the list in accordance with Article 39 § 3 of the Convention.
3.  Having carefully examined the remainder of the complaints raised by some of the applicants in the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matter complained of is within its competence, the Court finds that they do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike them out of its list of cases in so far as they concern the complaints about the delayed enforcement of the applicants’ judgments in accordance with Article 39 § 3 of the Convention;
Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible.
	Stephen Phillips	Mark Villiger
	Deputy Registrar	President

APPENDIX

No.	Application number,
applicant’s name
and date of birth	Date of introduction	Names of courts and dates of judgments about the delayed enforcement of which the applicants complain	Date of the declaration,
sums offered by the Government (in euros)	
1.	21013/07
YEGUPOVA,
Lyudmila Mikhaylovna, 1954	8 May 2007	Bagliyskiy District Court of Dniprodzerzhynsk, 31 January 2003 	2 February 2012,
1,620	
2.	21015/07
YEGUPOVA,
Tatyana Aleksandrovna, 1980	8 May 2007	Bagliyskiy District Court of Dniprodzerzhynsk, 31 January 2003 	2 February 2012,
1,620	
3.	21016/07
YEGUPOV,
Sergey Aleksandrovich,
1978	8 May 2007	Bagliyskiy District Court of Dniprodzerzhynsk, 31 January 2003 	2 February 2012,
1,620	
4.	30939/09
KNEVETS,
Leonid Semenovych, 1948	27 May 2009	Ovruch District Court, 9 November 2006 (the method of execution of the judgment was changed on 22 June 2011)	19 January 2012,
870	
5.	1594/10
VOVKOTRUB,
Vasyl Andriyovych, 1949	17 December 2009	Tarashcha Court,
11 May and 23 November 2007 	3 February 2012,
750	
6.	15812/10
KORZHUK,
Arkadiy Viktorovych, 1950	9 March 2010	Zhytomyr District Administrative Court,
11 January 2008 	3 February 2012,
720	
7.	17033/10
RUDYUK,
Mykhaylo Grygorovych, 1954	12 March 2010	Korolyovskyy District Court of Zhytomyr, 16 July 2009	3 February 2012,
450	
8.	35521/10
GRYBAN,
Rayisa Stepanivna, 1931	14 June 2010	Zhytomyr District Administrative Court,
20 December 2007	3 February 2012,
735	
9.	35557/10
OBUKHOVA,
Ganna Stepanivna, 1925	14 June 2010	Zhytomyr District Administrative Court,
16 January 2008	3 February 2012,
720	
10.	49993/10
PARASHCHYNETS,
Vasyl Dmytrovych, 1952	21 August 2010	Sokal Court, 18 May 2006	3 February 2012,
840	
11.	617/11
PATSYUCHENKO,
Vladimir Konstantinovich, 1962	20 December 2010	Simferopol Court, 14 July 2005 	3 February 2012,
1,155