Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 12.05.2010 «Дело Сулейманова (Suleymanova) против России» [англ.]

applicant as claimed under this head, plus any tax that may be chargeable on this amount.

B. Non-pecuniary damage

114. As regards non-pecuniary damage, the applicant claimed that she had suffered severe emotional distress, anxiety and trauma as a result of the killing of her four close relatives and on account of the indifference demonstrated by the Russian authorities during the investigation into these events. The applicant sought the amount of EUR 150,000.
115. The Government found the amount claimed excessive.
116. The Court has found a violation of Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention on account of the killing of the applicant's relatives. The Court thus accepts that she has suffered non-pecuniary damage which cannot be compensated for solely by the findings of violations. It awards to the applicant EUR 150,000 as claimed, plus any tax that may be chargeable thereon.

C. Costs and expenses

117. The applicant was 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, 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 and experts. The aggregate claim in respect of costs and expenses related to the applicant's legal representation amounted to EUR 6,516.
118. The Government did not dispute the reasonableness of and justification for the amounts claimed under this head.
119. The Court has to establish first whether the costs and expenses indicated by the applicant's representatives were actually incurred and, second, whether they were necessary (see McCann and Others, cited above, § 220).
120. Having regard to the details of the information and legal representation contract submitted by the applicant, the Court is satisfied that these rates are reasonable and reflect the expenses actually incurred by the applicant's representatives.
121. 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 the case involved little documentary evidence, in view of the Government's refusal to submit the case file. The Court thus doubts that research was necessary to the extent claimed by the representatives.
122. Having regard to the details of the claims submitted by the applicant, the Court awards her the amount of EUR 5,500 together with any value-added tax that may be chargeable to her, the net award to be paid into the representatives' bank account in the Netherlands, as identified by the applicant.

D. Default interest

123. 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 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 Ramzan Suleymanov, Petimat Aydamirova, Ibragim Suleymanov and Aslanbek Aydamirov;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances in which the applicant's relatives had been killed;
5. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Conve



> 1 2 3 ... 14 15 16

	Поделиться:	Tweet