в период неуплаты, плюс три процента;
4) отклонил оставшуюся часть требований заявительницы о справедливой компенсации.
Совершено на английском языке, уведомление о Постановлении направлено в письменном виде 26 ноября 2009 г. в соответствии с пунктами 2 и 3 правила 77 Регламента Суда.
Председатель Палаты Суда
Христос РОЗАКИС
Секретарь Секции Суда
Серен НИЛЬСЕН
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
FIRST SECTION
CASE OF ZAYTSEVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 11583/05)
JUDGMENT <*>
(Strasbourg, 26.XI.2009)
--------------------------------
<*> 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 Zaytseva 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 5 November 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (No. 11583/05) 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, Ms Zoya Mikhaylovna Zaytseva ("the applicant"), on 8 February 2005.
2. The applicant was represented by Mr I. Telyatyev, a lawyer practising in Arkhangelsk. The Russian Government ("the Government") were initially represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by Mr A. Savenkov, First Deputy Minister of Justice of the Russian Federation.
3. The applicant alleged, in particular, that she had not been apprised of the appeal hearing before the Arkhangelsk Regional Court and the appeal was considered in her absence.
4. On 30 November 2007 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 3).
THE FACTS
I. The circumstances of the case
5. The applicant was born in 1939 and lives in Arkhangelsk.
6. In 1975 the applicant was injured in a work-related accident. In 2004 she sued the Arkhangelsk Regional Health Department for disability benefits alleging that her current disability had resulted from that incident.
7. On 15 December 2004 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Arkhangelsk rejected the applicant's claims. The District Court examined, among other evidence, a decision by the Medical and Labour Expert Examination Service of the Arkhangelsk Region, which indicated that the applicant's disability had been caused by the injury she sustained in 1975.
8. The applicant lodged an appeal with the Arkhangelsk Regional Court. The appeal hearing was scheduled for 17 January 2005. According to the Government, the District Court dispatched summonses to the parties, including the applicant and her representative, informing them of the date and time of the appeal hearing. According to the applicant, she did not receive the sum
> 1 2 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 9