статьи 44 Конвенции выплатить заявителю 6700 евро (шесть тысяч семьсот евро) в качестве компенсации морального вреда, подлежащие переводу в рубли по курсу, который будет установлен на день выплаты, а также любые налоги, подлежащие начислению на указанную сумму;
b) что с даты истечения указанного трехмесячного срока и до момента выплаты на эти суммы должны начисляться простые проценты, размер которых определяется предельной кредитной ставкой Европейского центрального банка, действующей в период неуплаты, плюс три процента;
5) отклонил оставшуюся часть требований заявителя о справедливой компенсации.
Совершено на английском языке, уведомление о Постановлении направлено в письменном виде 25 февраля 2010 г. в соответствии с пунктами 2 и 3 правила 77 Регламента Суда.
Председатель Палаты Суда
Нина ВАИЧ
Секретарь Секции Суда
Серен НИЛЬСЕН
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF KAZYULIN v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 31849/05)
JUDGMENT <*>
(Strasbourg, 25.II.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 Kazyulin v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Nina {Vajic}, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 4 February 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (No. 31849/05) 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, Mr Vladimir Viktorovich Kazyulin ("the applicant"), on 5 August 2005.
2. The applicant was represented by Mr A. Zabusov, a lawyer practising in the Tambov region. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mrs V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 26 March 2007 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article 29 § 3).
4. The Government objected to the joint examination of the admissibility and merits of the application. The Court examined and dismissed their objection.
THE FACTS
The circumstances of the case
5. The applicant was born in 1962 and lives in Moscow.
6. On 14 August 1995 police arrested the applicant on suspicion of hooliganism and unlawful possession of firearms. On 17 August 1995 he was placed in custody.
7. In December 1995 the prosecution authorities referred the case to the Pervomayskiy District Court of the Tambov Region ("the District Court") for trial. The case was assigned to Judge V. However, in January 1996 the District Court returned the case to the prosecutor for additional investigation.
8. In February 1996 the applicant was released under a written undertaking not to leave the town.
9. According to the Government, between 1996 and 1999 the proceedings were suspended on several occasions, either because the applicant was sick or because he had breached the undertaking not to leave the to
> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7 ... 9 10 11