ents, the Court awards EUR 1,500 to the first applicant and EUR 1,500 to the ninth and tenth applicants jointly in respect of pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be charged thereon.
B. Non-pecuniary damage
163. The first, ninth and tenth applicant each claimed EUR 80,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage for the suffering they had endured as a result of the loss of their sons. The other twelve applicants claimed EUR 30,000 each in respect of non-pecuniary damage caused by the disappearance of their family members.
164. The Government found the amounts claimed exaggerated.
165. The Court has found a violation of Articles 2, 5 and 13 of the Convention on account of the unacknowledged detention and disappearance of the applicants' relatives. The first, ninth and tenth applicants have themselves been found victims of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention. The Court thus accepts that the applicants have suffered non-pecuniary damage which cannot be compensated for solely by the findings of violations. It finds it appropriate to award EUR 55,000 to the first applicant, EUR 55,000 to the ninth and tenth applicants jointly and EUR 850 to the second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth applicants each, plus any tax that may be charged thereon.
C. Costs and expenses
166. The applicants were represented by the SRJI. They submitted an itemised list of costs and expenses that included research and interviews in Ingushetia and Moscow, at a rate of EUR 50 per hour, and the drafting of legal documents submitted to the Court and the domestic authorities, at a rate of EUR 50 per hour for SRJI lawyers and EUR 150 per hour for SRJI senior staff, as well as administrative expenses, translation and courier delivery fees. The aggregate claim in respect of costs and expenses related to the applicants' legal representation amounted to EUR 7,416.55 to be paid into the applicants' representatives' account in the Netherlands.
167. The Government pointed out that the applicants should be entitled to the reimbursement of their costs and expenses only in so far as it has been shown that they were actually incurred and are reasonable as to quantum (see Skorobogatova v. Russia, No. 33914/02, § 61, 1 December 2005).
168. The Court now has to establish first whether the costs and expenses indicated by the applicants were actually incurred and, second, whether they were necessary (see McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, 27 September 1995, § 220, Series A No. 324).
169. Having regard to the details of the information and legal representation contracts submitted by the applicants, the Court is satisfied that these rates are reasonable and reflect the expenses actually incurred.
170. As to whether the costs and expenses incurred for legal representation were necessary, the Court notes that this case was rather complex and required a certain amount of research and preparation. It notes, however, that the case involved little documentary evidence, in view of the Government's refusal to submit the case files. Furthermore, owing to the application of Article 29 § 3 in the present case, the applicants' representatives submitted their observations on admissibility and merits in one set of documents. The Court thus doubts that the case involved the amount of research claimed by the applicants' representatives.
171. The Court thus awards the applicants the amount of EUR 4,000, together with any value-added tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, the net award to be paid into the representatives' bank account in the Netherlands, as identified by the applicants.
D. Default interest
172. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be b
> 1 2 3 ... 17 18 19
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
