иод неуплаты, плюс три процента;
4) отклонил оставшуюся часть требований заявительницы о справедливой компенсации.
Совершено на английском языке, уведомление о Постановлении направлено в письменном виде 12 февраля 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 MIKHAYLOVICH v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 30019/05)
JUDGMENT <*>
(Strasbourg, 12.II.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 Mikhaylovich 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 22 January 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (No. 30019/05) 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 Diana Ivanovna Mikhaylovich ("the applicant"), on 8 July 2005.
2. The applicant was represented by Mr A. Romanov, a lawyer practising in St Petersburg. 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 their Representative, Mr G. Matyushkin.
3. On 26 November 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).
THE FACTS
The circumstances of the case
4. The applicant was born in 1927 and lives in St Petersburg.
5. She owned and occupied a 15 square metre room in a communal flat in St Petersburg. In 1999 she decided to change her room, which was located on the fifth floor, to a similar room on the ground floor which would better suit her deteriorated state of health. Mr B. offered his help in improving her housing situation. Since it was impossible, according to the law, to pass over the owners of the remaining rooms in the same flat holding pre-empting rights, in order to sell the room to an individual found by Mr B., the applicant signed on 5 September 1999, following Mr B.'s advice and explanations by the notary, an agreement for the transfer of her room as a gift while in reality she sold it. Mr B. disappeared with the money after the deal. The applicant managed to occupy her room again. She learned that the room had meanwhile been sold to another individual K. who then died.
6. On 8 September 2000 the applicant requested the police to initiate criminal proceedings against Mr B. The police advised her to apply to a court.
7. On 14 September 2000 the applicant instituted proceedings against the buyer before the Frunzenskiy District Court of St Petersburg
> 1 2 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 9