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

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s7AF9E746 { width:20.69pt; display:inline-block } .sB410B153 { width:185.28pt; display:inline-block } .s5B081A9D { width:168.28pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s28F5597F { margin-top:18pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .sAC521AF { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sD8E76205 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt } .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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .s3A357E38 { text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sE3E14500 { height:37.2pt } .s41EA0776 { height:55.3pt } .sE44FE089 { height:74.35pt }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no 4136/13 Vasyl Grygorovych KOVAL against Ukraine and 44 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5   October 2017 as a committee composed of:   Nona Tsotsoria, President,   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer,   Lәtif Hüseynov, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appendices below, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicants are Ukrainian nationals, their personal details are set out in the appendices below. 2.     After the institution of the Convention proceedings, the applicant Mr   Viktor Vasylyovych Palchyk (application no. 19310/14) died. His widow Mrs Valentina Grygorivna Palchyk informed the Court that she wished to pursue the application of her late husband. 3.     The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, most recently, Mr I. Lishchyna, from the Ministry of Justice. 4.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 5.     On the dates set out in the appendices the national courts found for the applicants and ordered the defendants (the debtors) under these judgments to take certain measures or to pay various amounts to the applicants. The applicants claimed that the judgments became binding but the debtors delayed their enforcement. The relevant particular circumstances of the cases are outlined in the appendices below. 6.     On 20 January 2015 the applications were communicated to the Ukrainian Government within the pilot judgment procedure taken in the case of Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine (no. 40450/04, judgment of 15   October 2009). 7.     The respondent Government argued that the applications did not comply with the admissibility criteria of the Convention and invited the Court to declare them inadmissible. 8.     The applicants disagreed. COMPLAINTS 9.     The applicants, referring mostly to Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, complained about the delayed enforcement of judgments in their favour. Additionally, several applicants raised other complaints, mainly challenging the alleged unfairness, outcome and duration of the proceedings before the domestic courts. Some of the applicants also raised other complaints relying on Articles 14 and 17 of the Convention. THE LAW A.     Joinder of the applications 10.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. B.     Standing of the applicant in application no. 19310/14 11.     The Court considers that the applicant’s widow in application no.   19310/14 (see paragraph 2 above) has standing to continue the proceedings in the applicant’s stead (see, among other authorities, Mironov v. Ukraine , no.19916/04, § 12, 14 December 2006). However, reference will still be made to the applicant throughout the ensuing text. C.     Complaints related to protracted non-enforcement Applications set out in Appendix 1 12.     The Court notes that the respective complaints of the applications listed in Appendix 1 were lodged more than six months after the end of the situations in which the State could be held responsible for the non ‑ enforcement of the judgments. 13.     It follows that these complaints must be rejected pursuant to Article   35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention for having been lodged too late. Applications set out in Appendix 2 14.     The Court notes that the cases listed in Appendix 2 are similar to Svystun v. Ukraine ((dec.), no. 58915/16 and 2 other applications, 3   November 2016) in which the judgment debt was less than EUR 200 and the amount did not constitute the primary source of revenue for the applicant. 15.     In view of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the complaints should be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (b) and 4 of the Convention since the applicants have not suffered a significant disadvantage. Applications set out in Appendix 3 16.     The Court notes that the judgments in the cases listed in Appendix 3 were enforced within a reasonable time (see Soloshenko v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 3952/04, 15 November 2005). 17.     In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 and   4 of the Convention. Applications set out in Appendix 4 18.     In their observations the Government informed the Court (providing copies of the pertinent documents) that the relevant judgments of the first instance courts had not become enforceable and binding since the courts of appeal had quashed them and rendered new judgments partially favourable to the applicants. The applicants did not raise any complaints as regards non-enforcement of the judgments given by the courts of appeal. 19.     The Court notes that under such circumstances the applicants can neither complain of lengthy non-enforcement of judgments, nor can they claim to be a victim of the alleged violations of Conventional rights (see Khvorostyanoy and Others v. Ukraine [Committee], nos. 54552/09 and foll., 25 July 2013). 20.     It follows that these applications are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4. Applications set out in Appendix 5 21.     In their observations the Government, providing documents in support, informed the Court that the applicants had died before lodging the applications set out in Appendix 5 with the Court. 22.   The Court notes that an application cannot be brought in the name of a deceased person, since a deceased person is unable, even through a representative, to lodge an application with the Court (see Yaşa v. Turkey , no. 22495/93, Commission’s report of 8 April 1997, § 88, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998 VI, and Sterjov and Others v. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia , no. 40160/04, § 14, 16 October 2014). 23.     The Court observes that in the present cases the applicants died several months before their applications were lodged. It follows that the cases have not been brought by persons who can be regarded as applicants for the purposes of Article 34 of the Convention. Therefore, these applications are incompatible ratione personae with the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 §   4. 24.     Next-of-kin of Mr Shemetov and Mr Bondar expressed their wish to pursue applications nos. 16671/14 and 19212/14, respectively, instead of their deceased relatives. The Court notes that the next-of-kin of Mr   Shemetov and Mr Bondar may not pursue the applications in their own name as they were not a party to the domestic proceedings and they failed to substantiate their claims that there was an outstanding debt under the respective judgments to which they could be entitled as heirs of the deceased. Applications set out in Appendix 6 25.     In applications nos. 65220/13 and 4923/14 the applicants complained about non-enforcement of two judgments each. As regards the judgments listed under no. 1 in both applications, the amounts of debt awarded under the judgments were less than EUR 200 and the amounts did not constitute the primary source of revenue for the applicants (see Svystun v. Ukraine (dec.), cited above). The judgments listed under no. 2 in both applications were enforced within a reasonable time (see Soloshenko v.   Ukraine (dec.), cited above). 26.     In view of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the complaints should be rejected as inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. D.     Other complaints raised by the applicants 27.     In the applications set out in Appendix 1 (except for applications nos. 35535/13, 59413/13, 77198/13, 11525/14, 12909/14, 16432/14, 16668/14 and 60958/14), in the applications set out in Appendix 3 (except for applications nos. 58462/13 and 73068/13) and in application no.   4923/14 (Appendix 6) the applicants complained about the failure of the domestic authorities to continue payments of social benefits after 22 July 2011 in the amount fixed by the judgments given in their favour. 28.     The Court has examined similar complaints in the case of Velikoda v.   Ukraine ((dec.) no. 43331/12, § 21, 3 June 2014) where it concluded that “the Government’s obligation to ensure enforcement of the judgments ended when the amended legislation was applied to the applicant’s social payments”. It finds no reason for reaching a different conclusion in the present cases. 29.     These complaints must therefore be declared inadmissible, as being manifestly ill-founded, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. 30.     Several applicants also raised other complaints. In particular, referring to Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, they challenged the outcome, alleged unfairness and duration of the proceedings before the domestic courts. They also raised other complaints under Articles 14 and 17 of the Convention. 31.     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 these complaints do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or its Protocols and should be declared inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 26 October 2017.   Liv Tigerstedt   Nona Tsotsoria Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDICES List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) Appendix 1 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name, date of birth (if known), place of residence, nationality Relevant domestic decision     4136/13 14/12/2012 Vasyl Grygorovych KOVAL 28/03/1960 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Zavodskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 17/05/2011     16838/13 01/02/2013 Sergiy Mykolayovych IVASHCHENKO 18/12/1961 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 19/05/2011     25185/13 29/03/2013 Oleg Semenovych DIYUN Bucha Ukrainian Irpin Local Court of Kyiv Region, 15/10/2010     35535/13 22/05/2013 Zhanna Volodymyrivna KURTSEVA 12/07/1980 Zhytomyr Ukrainian Bogunskyy Local Court of Zhytomyr, 23/10/2008     38267/13 31/05/2013 Stanislav Vasylyovych KOSHCHEY 01/01/1960 Zmiyiv Ukrainian Zmiyiv Local Court of Kharkiv Region, 30/10/2009     38843/13 04/06/2013 Volodymyr Mykolayovych GUSYEV 02/06/1967 Kamyanets-Podilskyy Ukrainian Kamyanets-Podilskyy Local Court of Khmelnytskyy Region, 10/11/2010     38880/13 05/06/2013 Anton Stanislavovych YANOVSKYY 08/10/1960 Kamyanets-Podilskyy Ukrainian Kamyanets-Podilskyy Local Court of Khmelnytskyy Region, 10/11/2010     41436/13 14/06/2013 Gennadiy Oleksandrovych SKISOV 06/04/1940 Svitlovodsk Ukrainian Svitlovodsk Local Court of Kirovograd Region, 09/03/2010     59413/13 04/09/2013 Vasyl Yosypovych BUKHAY 02/01/1958 Kharkiv Ukrainian Moskovskyy Local Court of Kharkiv, 20/07/2009   67601/13 15/10/2013 Ivan Grygorovych DOVGAL 07/06/1950 Gadyach Ukrainian Gadyach Local Court of Poltava Region, 04/10/2011   70429/13 25/10/2013 Mykola Volodymyrovych DEMIDOV 28/04/1952 Zakharivka Ukrainian Vovchansk Local Court of Kharkiv Region, 01/06/2011   71916/13 08/11/2013 Oleksandr Mykolayovych SHKUROPATSKYY 25/07/1956 Khmelnytskyy Ukrainian Khmelnytsk Local Court of Khmelnytsk Region, 20/09/2011   72406/13 11/11/2013 Valeriy Mykytovych GOLUB 19/08/1946 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Ordzhonikidzevskyy Local Court of Kharkiv, 23/12/2010, as amended by Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 06/04/2011   77198/13 13/09/2013 Grygoriy Karlovych DYADECHKO 01/06/1953 Lubny Ukrainian Poltava Regional Court of Appeal, 28/09/2011   7810/14 23/12/2013 Viktor Ivanovich PONOMAREV 18/12/1952 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 11/07/2011   11525/14 22/01/2014 Yuriy Valentynovych SHEVCHENKO 01/03/1952 Oleksandriya Ukrainian Oleksandriya Local Court of Kirovograd Region, 15/06/2010   12909/14 03/02/2014 Oleksandr Mykolayovych KARDACH 09/09/1962 Tulchyn Ukrainian Vinnytsya Administrative Court of Appeal, 18/03/2011, as amended by Vinnytsya Administrative Court of Appeal, 05/10/2011   14320/14 30/12/2013 Olga Mykolayivna SHESTOUKHOVA 29/07/1956 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Leninskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 27/05/2011   16432/14 14/02/2014 Lyudmyla Yevtykhivna IVAKH 07/11/1940 Bogodukhiv Ukrainian Kharkiv Regional Administrative Court, 31/03/2009   16668/14 26/12/2013 Galyna Oleksiyivna KISTAYEVA 17/02/1938 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian   Zhovtnevyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 04/03/2011   16672/14 26/12/2013 Gennadiy Petrovych KOSTYLYEV 18/08/1962 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Zavodskyy District Court of Zaporizhzhya, 17/05/2011   17822/14 26/12/2013 Sergiy Ivanovych LAGODA 03/07/1957 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Zhovtnevyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 18/05/2011, as amended by Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 13/04/2012   17825/14 26/12/2013 Larysa Volodymyrivna PANCHENKO 27/11/1959 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Zhovtnevyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 24/06/2011   19310/14 26/12/2013 Viktor Vasylyovych PALCHYK 27/11/1949 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Leninskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 07/07/2011   36682/14 09/07/2014 Petro Vasylyovych GLADYSHCHUK 12/07/1950 Kirovograd Ukrainian Kirovskyy Local Court of Kirovograd, 14/07/2010   48344/14 26/06/2014 Iryna Ivanivna KUNYCHYK 07/02/1976 Lystvyn Ukrainian Ovruch Local Court of Zhytomyr Region, 22/07/2009   60958/14 20/08/2014 Valentyna Ivanivna LEVKIVSKA 22/06/1978 Levkovychi Ukrainian Ovruch Local Court of Zhytomyr Region, 12/07/2010   78516/14 05/12/2014 Oleksiy Yukhymovych KALUTSSKYY 28/04/1948 Shelyugy Ukrainian Yakymivka Local Court of Zaporizhzhya Region, 27/04/2011 Appendix 2 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name date of birth (if known) place of residence nationality Relevant domestic decision   33584/13 07/05/2013 Olga Igorivna DYKOPAVLENKO 04/02/1981 Burshtyn Ukrainian Lviv Administrative Court of Appeal, 05/05/2010   2090/14 04/12/2013 Olga Feodosiyivna KHLUPYANETS 10/01/1938 Kyrdany Ukrainian Ovruch Local Court of Zhytomyr Region, 05/03/2010, as amended by Ovruch Local Court of Zhytomyr Region, 04/04/2013 Appendix 3 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name date of birth (if known) place of residence nationality Relevant domestic decision details   58462/13 04/09/2013 Vasyl Oleksandrovych SLYUSAR Znamyanka Ukrainian Kirovograd Regional Court of Appeal, 11/12/2012   71896/13 08/11/2013 Larysa Anatoliyivna GUYDA 24/02/1965 Ternopil Ukrainian Ternopil Local Court of Ternopil Region, 07/10/2011   69478/13 17/10/2013 Dmytro Viktorovych SHEVTSOV 27/10/1967 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Komunarskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 30/12/2010, as amended by Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 19/04/2012   73068/13 08/11/2013 Viktor Mykhaylovych STELMAKH 24/01/1958 Zhovti Vody Ukrainian Zhovti Vody Local Court of Dnipropetrovsk Region, 23/08/2011, as amended by Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 13/02/2013   19198/14 27/12/2013 Borys Kuzmych LEZHYBOKOV 27/04/1948 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Zhovtnevyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 14/06/2011   19215/14 27/12/2013 Sergiy Mykolayovych PAVSHENKO 08/04/1956 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Komunarskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 14/11/2011   78610/14 05/12/2014 Mykhaylo Vasylyovych DYOMIN 24/02/1949 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Dnipropetrovsk Administrative Court of Appeal, 06/04/2013 APPendix 4 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name date of birth (if known) place of residence nationality Relevant domestic decision   19307/14 26/12/2013 Oleksandr Ivanovych MURATOV 29/01/1954 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian Leninskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 28/04/2011   36120/13 23/05/2013 Yuliya Ivanivna TYMCHUK 13/11/1937 Chorni Oslavy Ukrainian Nadvirna Local Court of Ivano-Frankivsk Region, 21/07/2009 Appendix 5 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name date of birth (if known) place of residence nationality Date of death of the applicant Relevant domestic decision   15975/14 30/12/2013 Mariya Grygorivna ARTAMONOVA 24/08/1932 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian 18/03/2013 Shevchenkivskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 20/05/2011   16173/14 30/12/2013 Lyubov Dmytrivna ARTYUKHOVA 09/02/1936 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian 17/07/2013 Shevchenkivskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 18/05/2011   16671/14 26/12/2013 Volodymyr Yegorovych SHEMETOV 05/08/1935 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian 31/03/2013 Zhovtnevyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 17/05/2011   19212/14 27/12/2013 Ivan Illich BONDAR 20/03/1944 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian 19/05/2012 Komunarskyy Local Court of Zaporizhzhya, 17/05/2011 Appendix 6 No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name date of birth (if known) place of residence nationality Relevant domestic decision   65220/13 02/10/2013 Rayisa Oleksandrivna KOBZEVA 27/09/1939 Kharkiv Ukrainian 1) Dzerzhynskyy Local Court of Kharkiv, 22/02/2011, as amended by Kharkiv Administrative Court of Appeal, 14/05/2012   2) Dzerzhynskyy Local Court of Kharkiv, 02/08/2010   4923/14 14/12/2013 Lidiya Petrivna GORBAN 11/04/1951 Balakliya Ukrainian 1) Balakliya Local Court of Kharkiv Region, 06/10/2011 2) Balakliya Local Court of Kharkiv Region, 04/04/2011