|
European Court of Human Rigths
206
19.4.2005
Press release issued by the Registrar
Chamber judgments concerning Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the
following five Chamber judgments, none of which is final .
Dolgov v. Ukraine (application no. 72704/01)
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Piryanik v. Ukraine (no. 75788/01)
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Sharko v. Ukraine (no. 72686/01) Violation
of Article 6 § 1
Nazarchuk v. Ukraine (no. 9670/02) Violation of
Article 6 § 1 and 13
Shcherbakov v. Ukraine (no. 75786/01) Violation Article 6 § 1 &
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
In these five cases the applicants are all Ukrainian nationals.
Aleksandr Olegovich Dolgov was born in 1958 and lives in Illovaisk,
Ivan Zakharovych Nazarchuk was born in 1941 and lives in Dolyns'ka,
Sergey Alekseyevich Piryanik was born in 1970 and lives in Privolye,
Georgiy Alekseyevich Sharko was born in 1939 and lives in Donetsk and
Anatoliy Aleksandrovich Shcherbakov was born in 1956 and lives in
Lysychansk (all Ukraine).
Mr Dolgov, Mr Piryanik and Mr Shcherbakov brought proceedings to
obtain arrears of pay. Mr Nazarchuk applied to the Ukrainian courts
seeking compensation for the illegal seizure and confiscation of his
car. Mr Sharko brought proceedings following the cessation of payment
of the invalidity pension to which he is entitled.
The applicants complained of the State authorities' failure to enforce
the judgments in their favour. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the
European Convention on Human Rights (right to a fair hearing within a
reasonable time), they complained of the lengthy period which had
elapsed before the sums awarded were paid. Mr Dolgov further alleged a
violation of Article 4 (prohibition of forced labour), Mr Sharko and
Mr Shcherbakov a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection
of property) and Mr Nazarchuk a violation of Article 13 (right to an
effective remedy). Lastly, Mr Sharko also alleged a violation of
Article 2 (right to life).
The European Court of Human Rights declared the applications of Mr
Nazarchuk, Mr Piryanik and Mr Shcherbakov admissible in their entirety
and those of Mr Dolgov and Mr Sharko admissible only as regards the
complaint under Article 6 § 1.
The Court noted that the decisions concerned were enforced in full
when the applications lodged with it by the applicants were
communicated to the Ukrainian Government. By failing to comply with
the judgments in the applicants' favour the national authorities had
prevented them from receiving the full amounts to which they were
entitled, for one year and eight months in the shortest case and for
more than four years in the longest. The Court accordingly held
unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 in each
of these cases.
The Court further held, unanimously, that there had been a violation
of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the case of Shcherbakov v. Ukraine
and a violation of Article 13 in the case of Nazarchuk v. Ukraine.
The Court considered that the finding of a violation constituted
sufficient just satisfaction for the damage alleged by Mr Nazarchuk.
Under Article 41 (just satisfaction), it decided to award the overall
sums of 2,500 euros (EUR) to Mr Dolgov, EUR 1,400 to Mr Piryanik, EUR
2,000 to Mr Sharko and EUR 1,500 to Mr Shcherbakov. (The judgments are
available only in English.)
***
These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts
of the Court's judgments are accessible on its Internet site
(www.echr.coe.int).
Registry of the European Court of Human Rights
F - 67075 Strasbourg Cedex
Press contacts: Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24
92)
Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21
42 15)
Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88
41 21 54)
Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the
Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged
violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1
November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal
number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The
Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted
to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a
Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council
of Europe supervises the execution of the Court's judgments. More
detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found
on its Internet site.
_______________________
Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights,
within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to
the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred
to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of
five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question
affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its
protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the
Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or
issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the
judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on
the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare
that they do not intend to make a request to refer.
|
|
 |
