give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the applications at the same time as their admissibility (Article 29 § 1).
4. By letter of 15 June 2009 Mrs Tatyana Nikolayevna Melnikova (born on 23 January 1948), Mr N.N. Melnikov's widow, informed the Court that on 15 December 2006 Mr N.N. Melnikov, the applicant in case No. 31419/06, had passed away, and she wished to maintain her late husband's case before the Court.
5. In letter dated 17 December 2009 Mr Vadim Nikolayevich Zakharov (born on 3 May 1979), Mr N.P. Zakharov's son, informed the Court that Mr N.P. Zakharov (application No. 28888/06) had died on 15 November 2009. The son expressed a wish to pursue the application in his stead.
6. For the sake of convenience, the Court will, however, continue to refer to Mr N.P. Zakharov and Mr N.N. Melnikov as "the applicants".
THE FACTS
I. The circumstances of the case
7. The eighty-seven applicants were born on the dates listed in Annex I and live in Novocherkassk, the Rostov Region.
8. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.
A. Initial domestic awards and subsequent
enforcement proceedings
9. The applicants, retired military officers, sued the military commissariats of Novocherkassk and the Rostov Region for recalculation of their pensions. One group of the applicants sought adjustment of the pension to the minimum wage and claimed arrears for 1995 - 1998 in line with the increase in the latter. Another group of the applicants claimed recalculation of their pensions on account of the increase of the monetary compensation paid in respect of the food allowance. Several applicants raised both types of claims before the domestic courts.
10. On the dates listed in Annex I the domestic courts found in the applicants' favour. As regards the case No. 25442/06 by Mr Pavlov, the judgment of 22 September 2004 was issued by the Justice of the Peace of the 6th Circuit of Novocherkassk. The judgment of 30 August 2004 in favour of Mr Pavlov, as well as all the judgments in favour of the remaining eighty-six applicants, were issued by the Novocherkassk Town Court of the Rostov Region.
11. The court ordered in respect of the first type of the claims that the pensions be adjusted to the minimum wage and that the arrears be paid to the applicants. As concerns the second type of the claims, the court held that the pensions should be increased in line with the increase of the daily food allowance and awarded the applicants the respective lump sums in arrears. The awards were made against the Military Commissariat of the Rostov Region, while the respective claims against the commissariat of Novocherkassk had been dismissed.
12. The representatives of the Military Commissariat of the Rostov Region were present at the court room on 30 August and 15 September 2004.
13. In several cases the respondent authority introduced the grounds of appeal with the Town Court. However, on various dates in 2004 the respondent authority revoked their applications. For example, in case of Mr Turutin (No. 18952/06) the grounds for appeal were revoked on 10 November 2004. As a result, none of the judgments was appealed against. They entered into force ten days later.
14. The applicants took various steps to obtain execution of the judgment. In particular, the Government submitted that in September - October 2004 Mr Sobolev, Mr Sedlyar and 31 other applicants sent the writs of execution to the respondent authority. It follows from the incoming correspondence log of the Rostov Regional Military Commissariat that the latter received the writs.
15. In 2005 the military prosecutor's office started an inquiry into lawfulness of proceedings concerning
> 1 2 3 ... 36 37 38
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
