 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> ROBOTA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE - 7158/04 - HEJUD [2013] ECHR 59 (17 January 2013) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2013/59.html Cite as: [2013] ECHR 59 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF ROBOTA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
(Application no. 7158/04 and 88 other applications)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
17 January 2013
This judgment is final. It may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Robota v. Ukraine,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,
Ann Power-Forde,
Helena Jäderblom, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 18 December 2012,
Having noted that the underlying question in the applications is already the subject of well-established case-law of the Court and that the parties had the ample opportunity to comment on it and on any other aspects of the case,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
THE FACTS
I. Non-enforcement issues
II. Other matters
THE LAW
I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 6 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION AND OF ARTICLE 1 OF PROTOCOL No. 1
Article 6
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] tribunal ...”
Article 13
“Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
“Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law ...
Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”
A. Admissibility
B. Merits
12. The Court reiterates that it has already found violations of the Convention in similar cases (see Kharuk and others, cited above, §§ 17-19).
13. Having examined all the material in its possession, the Court finds no fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion in the present cases.
14. There has accordingly been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the prolonged non-enforcement of the decisions in the applicants’ favour and a violation of Article 13 of the Convention in that the applicants did not have an effective domestic remedy to redress the damage created by such non-enforcement.
III. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE CONVENTION
IV. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
A. Damage, costs, and expenses
B. Default interest
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
1. Decides to join the applications;
2. Declares the applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the lengthy non-enforcement of the decisions given in their favour and about the lack of effective domestic remedies in respect of those complaints admissible and the remainder of the applications inadmissible;
3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention;
5. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to enforce the domestic decisions in the applicants’ favour which have not been enforced and is to pay, within three months, EUR 3,000 (three thousand euros) to each applicant or his or her estate in the applications tabulated in Appendix 1 and EUR 1,500 (one thousand five hundred euros) to each applicant or his or her estate in the applications tabulated in Appendix 2 in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants on the above amounts which are to be converted into the national currency at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 17 January 2013, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Stephen Phillips Boštjan
M. Zupančič
Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX 1
(non-enforcement delays more than three years)
APPENDIX 2
(non-enforcement delays less than three years)
|
No. |
Application no. and date of introduction |
Applicant’s name and date of birth (if known) |
Enforceable domestic decisions |
|
80. |
2025/05 28/12/2004 |
Viktor Viktorovych MELNYK 14/07/1959 |
22 /10/2002, Vyshgorod Court, became enforceable on 04/02/03 and was enforced on 28/10/05 |
|
81. |
2385/05 04/01/2005 |
Pavlo Ivanovych MALYUTA 01/01/1961 |
23/10/2003, Lenynskyy District Court of Kirovograd, became enforceable on 24/02/2004 and was quashed on 17/10/2006 |
|
82. |
30864/05 13/08/2005 |
Yevgeniy Petrovich SHYNKARYOV 02/07/1952 |
15/03/2005, Kyiv Military Harrison Court, enforced by 05/01/2007 |
|
83. |
31062/05 12/08/2005 |
Yuriy Ivanovich NAGOGA 13/12/1955 |
30/09/2004, Lebedyn Court, enforced on 24/05/2006 |
|
84. |
15057/06 06/04/2006 |
Nadezhda Vladimirovna PARKHOMENKO 10/05/1954 |
14/11/2005, Novokakhovka Court, enforced on 11/07/2008 |
|
85. |
15158/06 04/04/2006 |
Valentina Nikolayevna BOYKO 08/02/1949 |
15/11/2005 (court order), Novokakhovka Court, enforced on 11/07/2008 |
|
86. |
32723/06 10/07/06 |
Dmytro Myklayovych SHURUTA 27/04/1980 |
29/11/2005, Dzerzhynsk Court, enforced on 23/11/2007 |
|
87. |
2707/07 28/12/2006 |
Viktor Ivanovych PEDORYA 09/07/1949 |
20/03/2006, Oleksandriya Court, enforced on 22/01/2008 |
|
88. |
28983/08 07/06/2008 |
Viktor Vasilyevich SERDYUKOV 16/04/1956 |
03/07/2007, Krasnyy Luch Court, enforced on 30/04/2009 |
|
89. |
802/09 13/12/2008 |
Oleksandr Oleksandrovych LIFANOV 03/05/1963 |
11/03/2008, Vugledar Court, enforced on 26/11/2010 |