Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 23.07.2009 «Дело Марковцы и Селиванов (Markovtsi and Selivanov) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF MARKOVTSI AND SELIVANOV v. RUSSIA
(Applications Nos. 756/05 and 25761/05)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 23.VII.2009)

--------------------------------
<*> 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 Markovtsi and Selivanov 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 {Soren} <*> Nielsen, Section Registrar,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Having deliberated in private on 2 July 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in two applications (Nos. 756/05 and 25761/05) 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"). Application No. 756/05 was lodged by a Ukrainian national, Mr Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Markovtsi ("the first applicant"), on 6 December 2004. Application No. 25761/05 was introduced by a Russian national, Mr Yevgeniy Fedorovich Selivanov ("the second applicant") on 20 April 2005.
2. The first applicant was not represented by a lawyer before the Court. The second applicant was represented by Ms V.L. Demidova, a lawyer practicing in Mirnyy, the Sakha (Yakutiya) Republic. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On various dates the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the applications to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the applications at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).
4. As regards the application No. 756/05, the Ukrainian Government did not exercise their right to intervene in the proceedings (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention).
5. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application No. 25761/05, but the Court rejected this objection.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the cases

6. The first applicant was born in 1970 and lives in Ilnitsa, Ukraine. The second applicant was born in 1955 and lives in Lensk, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutiya).
7. In the 1990s the applicants subscribed to a State savings scheme for buying Russian-made cars. The State failed to fulfil its obligation to provide them with cars. The applicants brought court actions against the authorities, seeking to recover the monetary value of the State promissory notes for purchasing of a Russian-made car.
8. On the dates listed in the Appendix the domestic courts of the Sakha (Yakutiya) Republic upheld their actions and awarded them compensation in the amounts specified below, payable by the Ministry of Finance. On the dates listed in the Appendix the judgments were upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court of the Sakha (Yakutiya) Republic and became final. The enforcement proceedings were opened.
9. The awards remained unenforced.
10. On the dates cited in the Appendix the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Sakha (Yakutiya) Republic, upon an application from the Ministry of Finance and b

> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7