Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 23.09.2010 «Дело Антюшина (Antyushina) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF ANTYUSHINA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 23204/03)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 23.IX.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 Antyushina v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 2 September 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 23204/03) 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, Ms Larisa Viktorovna Antyushina ("the applicant"), on 19 June 2003.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 30 April 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 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

4. The applicant was born in 1942 and lives in Uspenskoye, the Krasnodar Region.

A. Proceedings concerning real estate transactions

5. The applicant and her husband were involved in a number of real estate transactions. On 1 June 1993 the applicant's husband presented her with a flat in Nevinnomyssk of the Stavropol Region which she subsequently exchanged for another flat in a different locality.
6. On 5 July 1994 the applicant became involved in the dispute challenging the four-way real estate exchange transactions through the claims brought by the other parties to the transactions.
7. On 26 December 1994 the Shpakovskiy District Court of the Stavropol Region ("the District Court") annulled the transactions concerning the applicant and her husband. The parties did not appeal, and the judgment came into force.
8. On 26 December 1995 and 30 September 1996 two other trial courts of the region adopted further judgments related to the same dispute. The parties did not inform the Court of the content of those judgments.
9. On 27 February 1997, at the applicant's request, the deputy president of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation brought an extraordinary appeal against the judgment of 26 December 1994.
10. On 14 March 1997 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation granted the appeal, quashed the impugned judgment and remitted the case for fresh consideration.
11. On 8 September 1997 the Presidium of the Stavropol Regional Court suggested that the District Court review the judgments of 26 December 1995 and 30 September 1996 on account of newly discovered circumstances.
12. On 22 September and 22 December 1997 the District Court explained to the applicant that it was necessary to file a request for review of the impugned judgments on account of newly discovered ci



> 1 2 3 ... 4 5 6

	Поделиться:	Tweet