CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 janvier 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .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 } .sF3B96856 { width:11.87pt; display:inline-block } .sE6F1442 { width:204.43pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .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 } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sD654500 { height:36.5pt }     THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 13986/05 Efletdin Muratkhanovich MIRZAKHANOV against Russia and 16 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5   January 2017 as a Committee composed of:   Branko Lubarda, President,   Pere Pastor Vilanova,   Georgios A. Serghides, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates set out in the appendix, Having regard to the decision to apply the pilot-judgment procedure taken in the case of Gerasimov and Others v.   Russia (nos. 29920/05 and 10   others, §   218, 1   July 2014), Having regard to the declarations submitted by the Government and the applicants’ acceptance of their terms, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants are Russian nationals whose names and dates of birth are set out in the appendix. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights. The applicants complained, among other matters, about the delayed enforcement of the judgments in their favour imposing various obligations in kind on domestic authorities and the lack of the effective remedies in respect of the non-enforcement complaint. Dates of the judgments, their entry into force and their full enforcement are set out in the appendix. In the wake of the pilot judgment, on various dates in late 2014 the applications were communicated to the Government (see Gerasimov and Others, cited above, §§   230-31, and point   13 of the operative part). On the dates specified in the appendix the Government submitted unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by the applications. In their declarations they acknowledged, in each case, the lengthy enforcement of the judgment in the applicant’s favour. The unilateral declarations further contained, in each case, the dates of the judgment at issue, its entry into force and its full enforcement, as well as an overall enforcement delay. The authorities 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 LAW Having regard to the similarity of the main issues under the Convention in the above cases, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision. The Court attaches particular weight to the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government. It finds that such agreement shall be considered 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 formal note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. The Court further considers that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols (Article   37   §   1 in fine of the Convention and Rule   62   §   3 of the Rules of Court). In any event the Committee of Ministers remains competent to supervise the execution of the terms of the friendly settlement as set out in the present decision (Article   39   §   4 of the Convention and Rule   43   §   3 of the Rules of Court). Further, in any event the Court’s present ruling is without prejudice to any decision it might take to restore, pursuant to Article   37   §   2 of the Convention, the present applications to its list of cases. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention. The Court considers that the amounts proposed by the Government should be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides, having regard to the terms of the Government’s declarations, and the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein, and the applicants’ acceptance of the terms of the declarations, to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention.   Done in English and notified in writing on 26 January 2017.   Fatoş Aracı   Branko Lubarda Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Representative Date of judgment Final on Enforcement date Enforcement delay as specified in the unilateral declaration Date of unilateral declaration Remedial offer (euros) Date of applicant’s letter in reply     13986/05 14/03/2005   Efletdin Muratkhanovich MIRZAKHANOV 04/03/1937 Pyatigorsk     24/12/2004 21/03/2006   17/09/2007 1 year 5 months 26 days 15/06/2016   1,460 29/07/2016     29140/09 24/03/2009   Mikhail Vladimirovich OVCHINNIKOV 05/12/1982 Perm     17/03/2008 27/03/2008   14/02/2011 2 years 10 months 18 days 31/05/2016   2,830 09/08/2016     51269/10 05/07/2010   Viktor Viktorovich KISHKEL 10/09/1959 Kaliningrad   Irina Ivanovna KISHKEL 23/07/1962 Kaliningrad   Sofiya Adolfovna KISHKEL 22/02/1938 Kaliningrad     1) 20/05/1999 quashed on 11/10/1999   2) 09/12/1999 quashed on 17/07/2000   3) 01/02/2001 28/03/2001   07/05/2008 7 years 1 month 14/07/2016   6,500 (jointly) 06/09/2016     14509/11 22/01/2011   Lyudmila Fedorovna DAVYDOVA 08/09/1955 Yaroslavl   Andrey Dmitriyevich KRYLOV 18/02/2008 02/06/2008   09/06/2014 6 years 7 days 14/07/2016   5,900 05/09/2016     18309/11 02/03/2011   Igor Anatolyevich STRILCHUK 29/11/1964 Moscow     05/11/2009 24/11/2009   22/05/2013 3 years 5 months 28 days 18/01/2016   3,420 09/03/2016     14208/12 11/02/2012   Marziya Galyanovna SHEVELEVA 15/07/1936 Chita     11/03/2011 06/07/2011   07/07/2014 3 years 1 day 18/01/2016   2,940 16/03/2016     23724/12 03/04/2012   Sergey Ivanovich GONCHAROV 19/01/1970 Moscow     01/04/2010 20/04/2010   29/03/2013 2 years 11 months 9 days 18/01/2016   2,880 29/02/2016     33390/12 14/04/2012   Aleksandra Konstantinovna ARONOVA 02/05/1932 Sokol     13/10/2011 23/10/2011   24/12/2014 3 years 2 months 1 day 18/01/2016   3,110 11/03/2016     73421/12 15/10/2012   Raisa Yevgenyevna ZHIGALOVA 04/08/1988 Syktyvkar     21/11/2011 08/12/2011   04/02/2014 2 years 1 month 27 days 18/01/2016   2,120 07/03/2016   3040/13 12/11/2012   Dmitriy Olegovich MALYSHEV 16/06/1970 Kaliningrad     15/09/2010 26/09/2010   17/12/2013 3 years 3 months 14/07/2016   3,160 14/09/2016   15685/13 31/01/2013   Yuriy Gennadyevich KONDRATYEV 18/04/1959 Ryazan     21/05/2009 09/07/2009   12/04/2013 3 years 9 months 14/07/2016   3,680 04/11/2016   25252/13 19/03/2013   Yuriy Grigoryevich GOLOVIN 25/06/1954 Pechora   Aleksey Leonidovich SHEVELEV 14/08/2008 26/08/2008   07/11/2014 6 years 2 months 12 days 17/02/2016   6,000 07/04/2016   39190/13 04/06/2013   Fedor Vasilyevich RUSSKIKH 27/02/1954 Izhevsk     11/04/2012 25/06/2012   20/03/2015 2 years 8 months 23 days 17/02/2016   1,340 22/03/2016   58566/13 26/08/2013   Darya Andreyevna KOMIRNAYA 21/02/1995 Volsk   Aleksey Borisovich VOLOGIN 15/03/2011 26/03/2011   15/08/2013 2 years 4 months 19 days 15/07/2015   2,340 26/08/2015   72348/13 09/11/2013   Ruzaliya Ivanovna AKMALETDINOVA 10/06/1965 Kazan   Flera Kamilyevna KHAKIMOVA 14/04/1983 Kazan   Alsu Railevna MINNIVALEYEVA 17/05/2005 Kazan   Yaroslav Teodorovich PODVA 19/03/2010 04/04/2010   24/07/2013 3 years 3 months 21 days 17/02/2016   3,240 (jointly) 08/04/2016   25541/14 13/03/2014 Dmitriy Yuryevich SHILKIN 01/05/1985 Syktyvkar   Aleksey Leonidovich SHEVELEV 08/08/2012 08/08/2012   10/03/2016 3 years 7 months 2 days   20/09/2016   3,510 16/11/2016   28403/14 21/03/2014   Yelena Viktorovna OVCHINNIKOVA 21/08/1971 Lipetsk   18/01/2012 29/02/2012   20/10/2014 2 years 7 months 19 days 17/02/2016   2,590 29/03/2016