Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 15.07.2010 <Дело Гелаевы (Gelayevy) против России» [англ.]

urad Gelayev. In addition, the second and fourth applicants claimed EUR 10,000 each for the ill-treatment to which they had been subjected on 27 February 2000 during the abduction.
171. The Government found the claims exaggerated.
172. 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' relative. The applicants themselves have been found to have been victims of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention. In addition, it has been established that on 27 February 2000 the second applicant was subjected to ill-treatment prohibited by Article 3. The Court thus accepts that the applicants have suffered non-pecuniary damage which cannot be compensated for solely by the findings of violations. It awards EUR 78,000 to the applicants jointly and EUR 10,000 to the second applicant as claimed, plus any tax that may be chargeable thereon.

C. Costs and expenses

173. The applicants were represented by the SRJI. They submitted an itemised schedule of costs and expenses that included research and interviews in Ingushetia and Moscow, at a rate of EUR 50 per hour for the work in the area of exhausting domestic remedies and EUR 150 per hour for the drafting of submissions to the Court. The aggregate claim in respect of costs and expenses related to the applicants' legal representation amounted to EUR 6,236.
174. The Government did not dispute the reasonableness of, or justification for, the amounts claimed under this head.
175. The Court has to establish first whether the costs and expenses indicated by the applicants' representatives 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).
176. 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 by the applicants' representatives.
177. As to whether the costs and expenses were necessary, the Court notes that this case was rather complex and required a certain amount of research and preparation. It notes at the same time, that 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 legal drafting was necessarily time-consuming to the extent claimed by the representatives.
178. Having regard to the details of the claims submitted by the applicants, the Court awards them the amount of EUR 5,500 together with any value-added tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, with the net award to be paid into the representatives' bank account in the Netherlands, as identified by the applicants.

D. Default interest

179. 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. Decides to join to the merits the Government's objection as to non-exhaustion of criminal domestic remedies and rejects it;
2. Declares the complaints under Articles 2, 3 (in respect of the torture of Murad Gelayev following abduction, the second applicant's ill-treatment during the abduction and the applicants' mental suffering), 5 and 13 of the Convention admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible;
3. Holds that there has been a substantive violation of Article 2 of the Convention in respect of Murad Gelayev;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention i

> 1 2 3 ... 24 25 26

0.1826 с