Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 04.03.2010 «Дело Толстобров (Tolstobrov) против России» [англ.]

as awarded significantly less sums than under the initial quashed judgment.
22. However, the interference with the applicant's possession rights created by the quashed judgment was lawful and pursued a legitimate aim of protecting the rights of the defendant company, and, having regard to the findings under Article 6 of the Convention, was proportionate.
23. Accordingly, there has been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

II. Other alleged violations of the Convention

24. The applicant complained under Article 6 about the outcome of the proceedings.
25. Having regard to all the material in its possession, and in so far as these complaints fall within its competence, the Court finds that there is no appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected as being manifestly ill-founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY

1. Declares the complaint concerning the supervisory review admissible and the remaining part of the application inadmissible;
2. Holds that there has been no violation of Article 6 of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of supervisory review.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 4 March 2010, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Christos ROZAKIS
President

{Soren} NIELSEN
Registrar

> 1 2 3