Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 26.11.2009 "Дело "Назаров (Nazarov) против Российской Федерации" [рус., англ.]

mage

131. The applicant claimed 30,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
132. The Government considered the claims exaggerated.
133. The Court notes that it has found violations of Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention in the present case. The applicant spent almost two years in custody, in inhuman and degrading conditions. One period of his detention lacked legal grounds; the whole period of the detention was excessively long. The applicant's appeals against extension orders were not examined speedily. In these circumstances, the Court considers that the applicant's suffering and frustration cannot be compensated for by a mere finding of a violation. The Court finds it appropriate to award the applicant EUR 15,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable on it.

B. Costs and expenses

134. The applicant was represented by Mr Ovchinnikov and his associates, Mr Bagryanskiy and Mr Mikhaylov, lawyers practising in Vladimir. He submitted a copy of an agreement dated 1 February 2005 under which the applicant had undertaken to pay Mr Ovchinnikov EUR 7,000 within thirty days from the date on which the Court's judgment in the applicant's case would enter into force, and a copy of an agreement dated 16 October 2008, which had replaced the agreement of 1 February 2005, under which the applicant had undertaken to pay the said sum under the same conditions to the legal bureau operated by Mr Ovchinnikov, Mr Bagryanskiy and Mr Mikhaylov. The applicant claimed reimbursements of his lawyers' fees in the amount of EUR 7,000.
135. The Government submitted that the costs had not actually been incurred.
136. The Court reiterates that costs and expenses will not be awarded under Article 41 unless it is established that they were actually and necessarily incurred, and are reasonable as to quantum (see Iatridis v. Greece (just satisfaction) [GC], No. 31107/96, § 54, ECHR 2000-XI). The Court considers that the applicant's claim is excessive. Regard being had to the information in its possession, the Court finds it appropriate to award EUR 3,500 in respect of legal costs, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

C. Default interest

137. 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 3 and 5 §§ 3 and 4, as well as the complaint under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention concerning the lawfulness of the applicant's detention between 4 and 16 August 2004 admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible;
2. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of the applicant's detention;
3. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention on account of the applicant's unlawful detention between 4 and 16 August 2004;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention;
5. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention;
6. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, the following amounts, to be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable at the date of settlement:
(i) EUR 15,000 (fifteen thousand euros) to the applicant in respect of non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable thereon;
(ii) EUR 3,500 (three thousand five hundred euros) in respect of costs and expenses, to be paid to the applicant's repres



> 1 2 3 ... 33 34 35

	Поделиться:	Tweet