ГЛАСНО:
1) постановил, что имело место нарушение статьи 10 Конвенции;
2) постановил:
a) что власти государства-ответчика обязаны в течение трех месяцев со дня вступления настоящего Постановления в силу в соответствии с пунктом 2 статьи 44 Конвенции выплатить заявительнице 1000 евро (одну тысячу евро) в качестве компенсации морального вреда, подлежащие переводу в рубли по курсу, который будет установлен на день выплаты, а также любые налоги, подлежащие начислению на указанную сумму;
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.
Совершено на английском языке, уведомление о Постановлении направлено в письменном виде 8 января 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 OBUKHOVA v. RUSSIA
(Application No. 34736/03)
JUDGMENT <*>
(Strasbourg, 8.I.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 Obukhova v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic},
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 4 December 2008,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application (No. 34736/03) 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, Ms Yelena Mikhaylovna Obukhova and Mr Aleksey Mikhaylovich Nevinitsyn, on 6 October 2003.
2. Ms Obukhova and Mr Nevinitsyn were represented before the Court by Ms V. Fomina, counsel for the Zolotoye Koltso newspaper. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. Ms Obukhova and Mr Nevinitsyn alleged a violation of the right to freedom of expression.
4. By a decision of 1 December 2005, the Court declared the complaint by Mr Nevinitsyn inadmissible and the complaint by Ms Obukhova ("the applicant") admissible.
5. The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1). The Court decided, after consulting the parties, that no hearing on the merits was required (Rule 59 § 3 in fine).
THE FACTS
I. The circumstances of the case
6. The applicant was born in 1963 and lives in Yaroslavl. She is a journalist on the Zolotoye Koltso newspaper.
7. On 17 January 2003 the newspaper published an article by the applicant under the headline "A year later they impounded the car" ("Через год арестовали автомобиль"). The article was prompted by the following letter written by a Ms P. and reproduced in italics in the opening passage of the article:
"On 22 September 2001 my husband... had a traffic accident. Ms Galina Borisovna Baskova, a judge of the [
> 1 2 3 ... 7 8 9 ... 13 14 15