CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 30 avril 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBAA06C68 { width:13.67pt; display:inline-block } .sC7BF4101 { width:166.26pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block } .sC202EACC { clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .sAE61E8C9 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s11517CCE { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s959CEE7E { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s5B8637C { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s52C919F8 { margin-left:34pt; text-indent:-26.47pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sF6A47939 { width:16.8pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sB673203C { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sED1A34C5 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s29BE6C23 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s78B6B604 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sCEE978D { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 12265/07 Volodymyr Petrovych STEPANISHCHEV against Ukraine and 3 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 30 April 2013 as a Committee composed of:   Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,   Ann Power-Forde,   Helena Jäderblom, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the applications lodged on the dates specified in the annexed table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and the applicants’ reply to those declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants are Ukrainian nationals whose details are specified in the appended table. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   N. Kultchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice. On various dates (see the table below) domestic courts and labour disputes commission delivered decisions according to which the applicants were entitled to various pecuniary amounts or to benefit from certain actions in their favour. The decisions became enforceable. However, the applicants were unable to obtain the enforcement of the decisions in due time because of the authorities’ failure to take specific budgetary or regulatory measures, or because of the bailiffs’ omissions. Relying on various provisions of the Convention, the applicants complained about the lengthy non-enforcement of the decisions given in their favour. THE LAW 1.     The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background. 2.     The Government submitted several unilateral declarations with a view to settling the applicants’ cases. By the declarations, the Government acknowledged the excessive duration of the enforcement of the applicants’ decisions and declared that they were ready to pay to the applicants the outstanding decision debts and the compensation sums specified in the annexed table. The Government invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The declarations also provided that the compensation sums were to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, would be free of any taxes that might be applicable and would be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. They would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article   37   § 1 (c) of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The applicants expressed their agreement with the terms of the Government’s declarations. The Court finds that following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties. It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. In light of the above the Court considers that the parties have actually reached a friendly settlement concerning the applications. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. Therefore, they should be struck out of the list in accordance with Article   39   of the Convention which is relevant in the present cases. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   Stephen Phillips   Boštjan M. Zupančič   Deputy Registrar   President   Appendix   No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant name, date of birth Enforceable domestic decisions Date of the Government’s unilateral declaration Compensation offered by the Government (in euros)               12265/07 16/02/2007 Volodymyr Petrovych STEPANISHCHEV 16/12/1954 Desnyansky District Court of Kyiv, 28/01/2003 14/08/2012 1,395               15409/10 03/03/2010 Svitlana Petrivna BOYKO 03/03/1980 Sykhivskyy District Court of Lviv (as amended on 18 June 2009 by the Lviv Administrative Court of Appeal), 30/12/2008 17/01/2012 465               35535/10 27/04/2010 Yuriy Oleksiyovych KUVIK 04/05/1952 Uzhgorod Court, 30/09/2008 01/06/2012 660               61975/11 05/03/2009 Lidiya Vasilyevna KALINSKAYA 18/11/1941 1) Labour Disputes Commission of the Avtosteklo company, 26/01/1998   2) Konstantynivka Court, 29/10/2002 13/08/2012 2,610