Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 30.04.2009 "Дело "Блинов и Блинова (Blinov and Blinova) против Российской Федерации" [рус., англ.]

орого может быть на них возложена;
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 заявителей о справедливой компенсации.

Совершено на английском языке, уведомление о Постановлении направлено в письменном виде 30 апреля 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 BLINOV AND BLINOVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 5950/04)

JUDGMENT <*>

(Strasbourg, 30.IV.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 Blinov and Blinova v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} <*> Nielsen, Section Registrar,
--------------------------------
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Having deliberated in private on 7 April 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (No. 5950/04) 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 two Russian nationals, Mr Aleksandr Nikolayevich Blinov and his wife Mrs Alla Ivanovna Blinova ("the applicants"), on 27 January 2004.
2. The applicants were represented by Ms O. Varnavskaya, a lawyer practising in Stavropol. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mrs V. Milinchuk, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 29 May 2007 the Court decided to communicate the complaints concerning non-enforcement and supervisory review of a binding judgment to the Government. Under the provisions of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility.

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

4. The applicants were born in 1963 and 1966 respectively and live in Stavropol.
5. As judges, the applicants were entitled to a service flat. As the flat had not been provided, the applicants sued the Pyatigorsk Town Council. On 10 June 2003 the Essentuki Town Court held for the applicants and ordered the council to:
"[P]rovide [the applicants] with a decent dwelling for a family of four, offering 12 sq. m per person and having an extra surface of 40 sq. m with regard to two family members' right to extra surface: either 20 sq. m per person or a separate room per person."
This judgment became binding on 8 September 2003, but was not enforced immediately.
6. In September - November 2003 bailiffs several times inquired with the council whether it had available flats. In December 2003 and February 2004 the bailiffs requested the court to change the mode of execution t



> 1 2 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 9

	Поделиться:	Tweet