Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 08.04.2010 «Дело Тасатаевы (Tasatayevy) против России» [англ.]

nly partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party."

A. Damage

117. The applicants did not submit any claims for pecuniary damage. As regards non-pecuniary damage, the applicants stated that they had lost their sons and endured stress, frustration and helplessness in relation to their sons' abduction, aggravated by the authorities' inactivity in the investigation of their kidnapping for several years. They left the determination of the amount of compensation to the Court.
118. The Government submitted that finding a violation of the Convention would be adequate just satisfaction in the applicants' case.
119. 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' sons. The applicants themselves have been found to have been victims of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention. The Court thus accepts that they have suffered non-pecuniary damage which cannot be compensated for solely by the findings of violations. It awards each of the applicants 60,000 euros (EUR), plus any tax that may be chargeable thereon.

B. Costs and expenses

120. The applicants were represented by Mr D. Itslayev, a lawyer practising in Nazran. The applicants submitted a contract with their representative and an itemised schedule of costs and expenses that included legal research and drafting, as well as administrative and translation expenses. The overall claim in respect of costs and expenses related to the applicants' legal representation amounted to EUR 5,217. The applicants submitted the following breakdown of costs:
(a) EUR 4,544 for 28.85 hours of interviews and drafting of legal documents submitted to the Court and the domestic authorities, at the rate of EUR 150 per hour;
(b) EUR 145 of administrative expenses;
(c) EUR 528 in translation fees based on the rate of EUR 80 per 1000 words.
121. The Government did not dispute the reasonableness of the amounts claimed.
122. The Court has to establish first whether the costs and expenses indicated by the applicant 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).
123. Having regard to the details of the information submitted by the applicant, the Court is satisfied that these rates are reasonable. It notes that this case was rather complex and required the amount of research and preparation claimed by the applicants.
124. Having regard to the details of the claims submitted by the applicants, the Court awards them the amount of EUR 5,000 together with any value-added tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, the net award to be paid into the representative's bank account, as identified by the applicants.

C. Default interest

125. 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. Declares the complaints under Articles 2, 3, 5 and 13 admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible;
2. Decides to join to the merits the Government's objection as to non-exhaustion of criminal domestic remedies and rejects it;
3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in respect of Aslan and Aslanbek Tasatayev;
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 Aslan and Aslanbek Tasatayev had disappeared;




> 1 2 3 ... 15 16 17

	Поделиться:	Tweet