Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное




Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 18.03.2010 «Дело Максимов (Maksimov) против России» [англ.]







EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF MAKSIMOV v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 43233/02)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 18.III.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 Maksimov v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Andre} <*> Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Having deliberated in private on 25 February 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 43233/02) 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 Vladimir Vladimirovich Maksimov ("the applicant"), on 22 November 2002.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that the domestic courts had refused to award him sufficient compensation for the damage caused as a result of the unlawful actions of police officers in April 2000, and that police officers had ill-treated him in December 2001.
4. On 20 May 2005 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).
5. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. Having examined the Government's objection, the Court dismisses it.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

6. The applicant was born in 1963 and lives in Krasnoyarsk.

A. Attempt to search the applicant's country
house in March 2000

7. On 2 March 2000 two police officers came to the applicant's country house, intending to search it. The applicant objected and the police officers left. According to the applicant they returned later that day, climbed over the fence and broke it.
8. On 23 December 2001 the applicant, having been unsuccessful in his attempts to initiate criminal proceedings against the police officers, lodged an action against the local prosecution authorities seeking compensation for damage resulting from their refusal to open a criminal case.
9. On 10 September 2002 the Krasnoyarsk Regional Court, at final instance, dismissed the action, finding that the prosecution authorities had no cause to institute criminal proceedings as the police officers had not searched the applicant's house.

B. Ill-treatment on 24 April 2000

1. Events on 24 April 2000

10. On 24 April 2000, at 2.30 a.m., two police officers, Mr N. and Mr Ne., and officer N.'s relative, Mr V., acting on information that the applicant owned an unregistered weapon, broke into his country house. The applicant and his fifteen-year-old daughter were in the house. The officers told the applicant th



> 1 2 3 ... 25 26 27

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1681 СЃ