Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 08.01.2009 «Дело Кондрашов и другие (Kondrashov and others) против России» [англ.]

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST SECTION

CASE OF KONDRASHOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Applications Nos. 2068/03, 2076/03, 5224/03,
5385/03, 5414/03 and 5656/03)

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 Kondrashov and others 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,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, 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 six applications (Nos. 2068/03, 2076/03, 5224/03, 5385/03, 5414/03 and 5656/03) 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 seven Russian nationals ("the applicants"). The applicants' names and the dates of their applications to the Court appear in the appended table.
2. The applicants were represented by Mr V. Gandzyuk, a lawyer practising in Ryazan. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr P. Laptev and Ms V. Milinchuk, former representatives of the Russian Federation at the Court.
3. The applicants complained of non-enforcement of binding and enforceable judgments delivered in their favour in 2001 and of their quashing in supervisory-review proceedings.
4. On 25 November 2003 the President of the First Section decided to communicate the complaint concerning the non-enforcement of the domestic judgments to the Government. On 21 May 2007 the President decided under Rule 54 § 2(c) of the Rules of the Court to invite the Government to submit further written observations notably concerning non-enforcement of these domestic judgments and their quashing by way of supervisory review. It was also decided to examine the merits of the applications at the same time as their admissibility (Article 29 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. The circumstances of the case

5. The applicants' names and other details are indicated in the appended table. All the applicants were members of the Russian military forces and took part in peace-keeping operations in former Yugoslavia and/or in other military missions outside the Russian Federation.
6. In 2001 they sued the military unit No. 03611 before the Ryazan Garnison Military Court for payment of outstanding daily allowance allegedly due to them on account of their military missions abroad. The court granted the applicants' claims (see dates of the judgments and sums awarded in the appended table). The judgments were not appealed against and became binding and enforceable on the dates indicated in the appended table.
7. The judgments of 11 December 2001 were not enforced. On 6 November 2002 the Presidium of the Moscow Circuit Military Court decided, upon its President's request for supervisory review, to quash these judgments in view of an erroneous application of material law and sent the cases for a new consideration to the Ryazan Garnison Military Court (judgments Nos. 338п/г, 339п/г and 341п/г). The applicants



> 1 2 3 ... 6 7 8

	Поделиться:	Tweet