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 18.06.2009 «Дело Сухов (Sukhov) против России» [англ.]





rotocols. 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.

III. Application of Article 41 of the Convention

39. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
"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

40. The applicant claimed 1,000,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
41. The Government submitted that the applicant's claims were excessive, unreasonable and unsubstantiated.
42. The Court accepts that the applicant suffered distress, anxiety and frustration because of the unreasonable length of the proceedings in his case, which could not be compensated by a mere finding of a violation of the Convention. However, the sum claimed by the applicant is excessive. Making its assessment on an equitable basis and taking into account relevant aspects, such as the overall length of the proceedings and what was at stake for the applicant, the Court awards him EUR 3,600 under that head, plus any tax that may be chargeable on the above amount.

B. Costs and expenses

43. The applicant did not make any claims for the costs and expenses incurred before the domestic courts and before the Court.
44. Accordingly, the Court does not award anything under this head.

C. Default interest

45. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY

1. Declares the complaint concerning the excessive length of the proceedings admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible;
2. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention;
3. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 3,600 (three thousand six hundred euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable at the date of the settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;
4. Dismisses the remainder of the applicant's claim for just satisfaction.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 18 June 2009, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Christos ROZAKIS
President

(Soren} NIELSEN
Registrar






> 1 2 ... 3 4 5

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1402 СЃ