Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 29.04.2010 «Дело Сметанко (Smetanko) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF SMETANKO v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 6239/04)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 29.IV.2010)

--------------------------------
<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Smetanko v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Nina {Vajic} <*>, President,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Andre} Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 30 March 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 6239/04) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Mr Ivan Yakovlevich Smetanko ("the applicant"), on 28 January 2004.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were initially represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights and subsequently by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that the civil proceedings to which he had been a respondent party had been unreasonably long and that there had been a delay in the enforcement of a judgment in his favour.
4. On 7 January 2008 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

5. The applicant was born in 1939 and lives in Solyanoye in the Krasnodar Region.

A. Division of property

6. On 25 March 1993 Ms N., the applicant's former partner, brought an action against him seeking recognition of her rights in respect of the house registered in the applicant's name. The applicant brought a counter-action seeking division of her property.
7. On 16 February 1995 the Dinskiy District Court of the Krasnodar Region granted N.'s claims in part and dismissed the applicant's claims. On 16 April 1996 the Krasnodar Regional Court quashed the judgment of 16 February 1995 on appeal and sent the matter for fresh consideration.
8. On 10 June 1996 the Prikubanskiy District Court of the Krasnodar Region approved a friendly settlement agreement entered into by the applicant and N. and discontinued the proceedings. The applicant appealed. On 18 July 1996 the Regional Court quashed the decision of 10 June 1996 and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.
9. On 15 August 1997 the Prikubanskiy District Court granted N.'s claims in part and dismissed the applicant's claims. On 18 September 1997 the Regional Court quashed the judgment of 15 August 1997 on appeal and again remitted the matter for fresh consideration.
10. On 27 March 1998 the Dinskiy District Court dismissed all the claims and counterclaims in full. On 21 May 1998 the Regional Court quashed the judgment of 27 March 1998 and remitted the matter for fresh conside

> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8