ayment of compensation where appropriate, a thorough and effective investigation capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible for the deprivation of life and infliction of treatment contrary to Article 3, including effective access for the complainant to the investigation procedure leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible (see Anguelova v. Bulgaria, No. 38361/97, §§ 161 - 162, ECHR 2002-IV, and {Suheyla Aydin} v. Turkey, No. 25660/94, § 208, 24 May 2005). The Court further reiterates that the requirements of Article 13 are broader than a Contracting State's obligation under Article 2 to conduct an effective investigation (see Khashiyev and Akayeva, cited above, § 183).
108. It follows that, in circumstances where, as here, the criminal investigation into the abduction and the violent death was ineffective and the effectiveness of any other remedy that may have existed, including civil remedies, was consequently undermined, the State has failed in its obligation under Article 13 of the Convention.
109. Consequently, there has been a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention.
110. As regards the applicants' reference to Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention, the Court considers that, in the circumstances, no separate issues arise in respect of Article 13 in conjunction with Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention (see Kukayev v. Russia, No. 29361/02, § 119, 15 November 2007, and Aziyevy v. Russia, No. 77626/01, § 118, 20 March 2008).
VII. Application of Article 41 of the Convention
111. 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. Pecuniary damage
112. The second applicant claimed damages in respect of the lost wages of her son Valid Dzhabrailov. She claimed a total of 156,540 Russian roubles (RUB) under this head (3,820 euros (EUR)). Her calculations were based on the provisions of the Russian Civil Code and the actuarial tables for use in personal injury and fatal accident cases published by the United Kingdom Government Actuary's Department in 2007 ("Ogden tables").
113. The Government regarded these claims as unsubstantiated.
114. The Court reiterates that there must be a clear causal connection between the damage claimed by the applicants and the violation of the Convention, and that this may, in an appropriate case, include compensation in respect of loss of earnings. Having regard to its above conclusions, it finds that there is a direct causal link between the violation of Article 2 in respect of Valid Dzhabrailov and the loss by the second applicant of the financial support which he could have provided. Having regard to the applicants' submissions and the fact that Valid Dzhabrailov was not employed on a regular basis at the time of his apprehension, the Court awards EUR 3,500 to the second applicant in respect of pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount.
B. Non-pecuniary damage
115. The applicants claimed a total of EUR 140,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage for the suffering they had endured as a result of the loss of their family member and the indifference shown by the authorities towards them. The first applicant also claimed that he had endured moral suffering because of his detention, ill-treatment and the subsequent attempt to kill him, and the authorities' failure to properly investigate the matter. He claimed EUR 80,000 under this head; the second applicant as the mother of the first applicant and Valid Dzhabrailov claim
> 1 2 3 ... 15 16 17 18
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
