CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 15 mars 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sBAD0D18F { width:1.87pt; display:inline-block } .sC95ED60 { width:188.43pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s1EDF3BA6 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s529BF6EF { page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .sEDC5336B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s4EFEAD { width:14.32pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .sCBC20640 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 41849/04 Vladimir Petrovich BAZHENOV and Zhanna Grigoryevna BAZHENOVA against Russia and 24 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 15   March 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Helena Jäderblom, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Branko Lubarda, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates indicated in the Appendix, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government on various dates (see the Appendix) requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and the applicants’ replies to those declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE A list of applicants is set out in the Appendix. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   G.   Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. The applicants were parties to civil proceedings that took place in courts of ordinary jurisdiction and in commercial courts in various regions of Russia. These disputes concerned various civil matters such as labour, housing, property and monetary issues. The impugned proceedings lasted between three and twelve years. The applicants complained, in particular, about the length of the proceedings in their cases. On the dates specified in the Appendix the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications. They acknowledged that the length of the proceedings in the applicants’ cases had been in breach with the “reasonable time” requirement set down in Article 6 of the Convention. They stated their readiness to pay to the applicants the sums listed in the Appendix as just satisfaction. The payments were to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and would be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay the sums within the said 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 payments would constitute the final resolution of the cases. In their letters received on the dates indicated in the Appendix, the applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the Government’s declarations. The Court considers that the amounts proposed by the Government should be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable on the date of payment. THE LAW A.     Joinder of the applications Given their similar factual and legal background, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision. B.     Locus standi as regards application no. 3543/06 The Court takes note of Mr Aleksandr Pavlovich Yerastov’s death on 21   March 2008 and of the wish of Ms   Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova, his widow, to pursue the proceedings in his stead. On 28 June 2013 the Court received the certificate confirming that the applicant’s widow was his legal successor. The Court has previously accepted that close relatives of applicants who have died can maintain applications that include complaints concerning various aspects of Article   6 of the Convention (see Shiryayeva v.   Russia , no.   21417/04, §   8, 13   July 2006, concerning the non-enforcement of domestic judgments, and Horváthová v.   Slovakia , no.   74456/01, §   26, 17   May 2005, in the context of the length of proceedings). The Government did not contend that Ms   Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova, the legal successor of her deceased husband, had no standing to pursue the case. Therefore, the Court considers that the applicant’s widow has a legitimate interest in pursuing the application. C.     Complaints about the length of proceedings The Court finds that following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Cēsnieks v.   Latvia (dec.), no.   9278/06, §   34, 6 March 2012, and Bakal and Others v.   Turkey (dec.), no.   8243/08, 5   June 2012). The Court therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties in each case. It is satisfied that the settlements are 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 view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in respect of the complaints about the length of proceedings. D.     Complaints of lack of an effective domestic remedy Some of the applicants complained under Article 13 of the Convention that they did not have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy in respect of the excessive length of proceedings. The Government did not specify their position in relation to this complaint. The Court takes cognisance of the existence of a new remedy against excessive length of proceedings introduced by federal laws №   68-FZ and №   69-FZ on 4 May 2010 in the wake of the pilot judgment adopted in the case of Burdov v. Russia (no. 2) (no.   33509/04, ECHR 2009), and notes that all the applicants were in principle enabled to claim compensation under the transitional provisions of the new law (see Palacheva v.   Russia , no.   39814/04, §   72, 19   June 2014). Having regard to the above, the Court does not find it necessary to continue a separate examination of the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention in the present cases (see Zemlyanskiy and Others v. Russia (dec.), nos. 18969/06 et al., 13 March 2012, and Pobudilina and Others v.   Russia (dec.), nos. 7142/05 et al., 29   March 2011). E.     Other complaints Some of the applicants raised additional complaints with reference to various Articles of the Convention and its Protocols. However, in the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, the Court finds that they do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols. It follows that the applications in this part are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides that in respect of application no. 3543/06, Ms Natalia Ivanovna Yerastova has standing to continue the proceedings in Mr   Aleksandr Pavlovich Yerastov’s stead; Decides to strike out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention the applications in respect of the complaints about the length of proceedings; Decides that there is no need for separate examination of the complaints under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective remedy; Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible.   Done in English and notified in writing on 7 April 2016.   Marialena Tsirli   Helena Jäderblom Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX No Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Date of declaration and compensation offered (in euros) Acceptance of the declaration by the applicant(s) received on   41849/04 26/10/2004 Vladimir Petrovich BAZHENOV 06/03/1942 Rylsk   Zhanna Grigoryevna BAZHENOVA 24/10/1944 Rylsk   Represented by: Ilya Vladimirovich SIVOLDAYEV 06/04/2015   EUR 2,000 jointly 28/07/2015   21719/05 12/05/2005 Vladimir Dmitriyevich ZAKHAROV 11/12/1935 St Petersburg 13/01/2015   EUR 4,000 17/02/2015   3369/06 09/12/2005 Aleksey Petrovich BORISOV 04/03/1965 St Petersburg   Represented by: Aleksandr Lazarevich LIFSHITS 06/04/2015   EUR 2,500 27/05/2015   3543/06 01/11/2005 Natalya Ivanovna YERASTOVA 29/01/1960 Nizhniy Novgorod   Anna Aleksandrovna MUKHINA [1] 29/12/1985 Nizhniy Novgorod   Yelena Aleksandrovna BAZHAYEVA [2] 05/01/1988 Nizhniy Novgorod   Aleksandr Pavlovich YERASTOV 13/08/1960 - 21/03/2008 Nizhniy Novgorod   Legal successor: Natalya Ivanovna YERASTOVA 06/02/2015   EUR 1,200 to N.I.   Yerastova;   EUR 2,800 to each of the applicants A.A.   Mukhina and Ye.A.   Bazhayeva;   EUR 3,000 to N.I.   Yerastova as legal successor of A.P.   Yerastov 09/03/2015   31477/06 16/05/2006 Mariya Fedorovna POLYAKOVA 06/03/1956 Pevek 06/04/2015   EUR 3,700 21/07/2015   13446/07 30/01/2007 Aleksey Yuryevich BARANOV 21/06/1973 Vyborg   Represented by: Tatyana Fedorovna KLYKOVA 06/04/2015   EUR 2,000 09/06/2015   15425/07 23/01/2007 Valentina Aleksandrovna PACHKUNOVA 17/05/1946 St Petersburg   Nina Petrovna PACHKUNOVA 18/02/1976 St Petersburg 13/01/2015   EUR 3,500 to each applicant 09/04/2015   19359/07 26/03/2007 Aleksandr Yevgenyevich PROKHOROV 22/01/1962 St Petersburg   Represented by: Aleksandr Lazarevich LIFSHITS 13/01/2015   EUR 500 05/03/2015   47213/07 17/10/2007 Nataliya Anatolyevna STEPANOVA 13/01/1948 Krasnogorsk   Konstantin Lvovich STEPANOV 02/07/1947 Krasnogorsk 13/01/2015   EUR 2,000 to each applicant 07/04/2015             1989/08 09/11/2007 Olga Aleksandrovna GRIBANOVA 18/10/1958 Ufa 18/09/2015   EUR 3,000 02/12/2015             16602/08 19/02/2008 Dmitriy Nikolayevich NERETIN 13/02/1962 Tula 18/09/2015   EUR 900 17/11/2015             25210/08 01/04/2008 Igor Yuryevich SVIRIDOV 08/04/1989 St Petersburg 18/09/2015   EUR 2,400 10/11/2015             26895/08 29/03/2008 Valentin Fedorovich KIRICHENKO 24/02/1946 Novoyasenevo 18/09/2015   EUR 1,800 15/12/2015             30813/08 12/04/2008 Vladimir Aleksandrovich VEDERNIKOV 02/12/1952 Kuznetsk 18/09/2015   EUR 2,000 05/11/2015             33928/08 30/04/2008 Viktor Petrovich RYAZANTSEV 13/08/1948 Kaliningrad 18/09/2015   EUR 2,400 09/11/2015             40971/08 31/07/2008 Aleksandr Sergeyevich KOVALENKO 17/03/1970 Ilanskiy 18/09/2015   EUR 2,000 10/11/2015             45315/08 21/07/2008 Irina Aleksandrovna KAZARINA 03/03/1950 St Petersburg 18/09/2015   EUR 2,800 17/11/2015             45521/08 21/07/2008 Maksim Eduardovich MIROSHNIKOV 04/02/1973 Kushmangort 18/09/2015   EUR 1,200 24/11/2015             48888/08 01/09/2008 Andrey Valentinovich TSVETKOV 23/08/1961 Sovetsk 18/09/2015   EUR 2,600 24/11/2015             56777/08 30/08/2008 Raisa Mitrofanovna BUDURATSKAYA 01/08/1946 Svetlogorsk 18/09/2015   EUR 2,000 19/11/2015             61024/08 05/11/2008 Galina Mikhaylovna ZHUBRINA 28/10/1950 Anapa 18/09/2015   EUR 2,100 28/10/2015             7923/09 17/01/2009 Mugallima Zakirovna TUKTAROVA 07/02/1942 Nizhnyaya Maktama 18/09/2015   EUR 1,100 12/11/2015             10510/09 15/07/2008 Valentina Aleksandrovna SKRIPINA 17/08/1934 Anapa 18/09/2015   EUR 2,300 23/11/2015             14356/09 14/02/2009 Aleksandr Aleksandrovich TKACHEV 08/02/1954 Krasnyy Vostok 18/09/2015   EUR 3,200 04/11/2015             18836/09 22/11/2008 Anatoliy Ivanovich PRITYKO 07/03/1958 Omsk 18/09/2015   EUR 1,800 25/01/2016   [1] .     In the course of the proceedings before the Court the last name of this applicant changed from Yerastova to Mukhina. [2] .     In the course of the proceedings before the Court the last name of this applicant changed from Yerastova to Bazhayeva.