Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 05.03.2009 «Дело Бычков (Bychkov) против России» [англ.]

Application of Article 41 of the Convention

49. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
"If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party."

A. Damage

50. The applicant claimed 140,400 euros (EUR) in respect of pecuniary damage. He submitted that that sum represented capital losses accrued during his detention. The applicant argued that he had not been able to work during the criminal proceedings, his relatives had to support him during the whole period of his detention. He further claimed EUR 1,260,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
51. The Government contested the existence of a causal link between the alleged violation and the pecuniary loss alleged by the applicant. They further argued that the applicant's claim pertaining to non-pecuniary damage was excessive and unsubstantiated. In any event, a finding of a violation would constitute sufficient just satisfaction.
52. The Court notes that the decision to prefer criminal charges against the applicant was not the subject of its review in the present case. It shares the Government's view that there is no causal link between the violations found and the pecuniary damage claimed (see Nakhmanovich v. Russia, No. 55669/00, § 102, 2 March 2006). The Court finds no reason to award the applicant any sum under this head. Nevertheless, the Court accepts that the applicant suffered humiliation and distress because of the inhuman and degrading conditions of his detention, which cannot be compensated for by a mere finding of a violation. Making its assessment on an equitable basis, and taking into account in particular, the length of the applicant's detention, it awards the applicant EUR 15,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, plus any tax that may be chargeable on that amount.

B. Costs and expenses

53. As the applicant did not claim costs and expenses, the Court makes no award under this head.

C. Default interest

54. 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 complaint concerning the conditions of the applicant's detention in facilities Nos. IZ-77/2 and IZ-77/3 admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible;
2. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention;
3. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 15,000 (fifteen thousand euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;
4. Dismisses the remainder of the applicant's claim for just satisfaction.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 5 March 2009, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Christos ROZAKIS
President

{Soren} NIELSEN
Registrar






> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7

	Поделиться:	Tweet