Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 04.03.2010 «Дело Баранцева (Barantseva) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF BARANTSEVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 22721/04)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 4.III.2010)

--------------------------------
<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Barantseva v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 9 February 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 22721/04) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Ms Tatyana Yevdokimovna Barantseva ("the applicant"), on 28 May 2004.
2. The Russian Government ("the Government") were initially represented by Ms V. Milinchuk and Mr A. Savenkov, former Representative and former acting Representative respectively of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their Representative, Mr G. Matyushkin.
3. On 11 March 2008 the President of the First Section decided to communicate the complaint concerning the length of the proceedings to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

The circumstances of the case

4. The applicant was born in 1935 and lives in Krasnogorsk, the Moscow Region.
5. In May 1995 the applicant signed a contract with a building partnership. Under the terms of the contract the applicant was obliged to pay the company a certain sum, and the company was obliged to provide the applicant with a garage.
6. Since the company failed to comply with its obligation, on 4 December 1996 the applicant brought court proceedings seeking to oblige the company to provide her with a garage and compensate her for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage.

A. First examination of the case

7. On 19 March 1997 the Krasnogorsk Town Court scheduled a hearing for 31 March 1997.
8. In the period between 31 March 1997 and 29 October 1997 the hearing was adjourned on two occasions because of the absence of the parties, and on two occasions because the judge was sitting in unrelated proceedings.
9. On 29 October 1997 the applicant's case was joined to twenty-four similar cases initiated by other plaintiffs against the same defendant, and the hearing was adjourned until an unspecified date.
10. On 4 December 1997 the applicant modified her claims in so far as they concerned the amount of interest and compensation for legal costs to be paid to her by the defendant.
11. Following a request by the parties, on 9 December 1997 the hearing was adjourned until 14 January 1998.
12. On 14 January 1998 some of the cases were assigned to be examined separately. The hearing was adjourned until an unspecified date.
13. On 18 February 1998 the hearing was adjourned until 18 March 1998 because the judge was sitting in unrelated pr



> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7

	Поделиться:	Tweet