CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 19 octobre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:1pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; 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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6C5BED22 { margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3A692EA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sB25A0399 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:24.84pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.66pt; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF920FE69 { font-family:Arial; color:#f8f8f8 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF114237 { width:19.02pt; display:inline-block } .s8E363992 { width:147.54pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s2753FA3F { width:163.53pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .sE74C84FB { width:20.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s4EFEAD { width:14.32pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sCBC20640 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 8090/09 Mevludi JIOSHVILI against Russia and 58 other applications (see list appended)   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 19   October 2021 as a Chamber composed of:   Jon Fridrik Kjølbro, President,   Carlo Ranzoni,   Aleš Pejchal,   Dmitry Dedov,   Egidijus Kūris,   Pauliine Koskelo,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the Appendix, Having regard to the decision of 24   August 2011 to give notice of the applications to the Russian Government (“the Government”) for information, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS 1.     A list of the applicants, all of whom are Georgian nationals, and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the Appendix. 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. 3.     As a result of the armed conflict in August 2008 (see Georgia v.   Russia   (II) [GC], no.   38263/08, §§   30-44, 21   January 2021), the applicants were forcibly displaced from their respective villages in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. To this day, they have no access to their homes and property. COMPLAINTS 4 .     Relying on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1, all the applicants complain that they have been displaced because of the August 2008 armed conflict and have been unable to access their homes and property. They also allege that their property was destroyed or damaged as a result of the hostilities, sometime between 8   and 12   August 2008. 5 .     All the applicants, except those in applications nos. 14681/09 and 47954/09, reiterate the complaint concerning their inability to access their homes and property (see the previous paragraph) (i)   under Article   8 of the Convention and Article 2 of Protocol No. 4 in respect of applications nos.   8153/09, 8204/09, 8525/09, 8538/09, 8554/09, 8603/09, 8799/09, 8912/09, 8989/09, 8996/09, 9218/09, 9239/09, 9891/09, 9913/09, 10046/09, 10341/09, 16518/09, 16574/09, 17296/09, 19795/09, 19810/09 and 52486/09; and (ii)   only under Article   8 of the Convention in respect of applications nos.   8090/09, 8104/09, 8121/09, 8129/09, 8133/09, 8135/09, 8145/09, 8154/09, 8168/09, 8180/09, 8182/09, 8202/09, 8228/09, 8233/09, 8237/09, 8239/09, 8240/09, 8262/09, 8375/09, 8724/09, 9000/09, 9035/09, 9089/09, 9099/09, 9465/09, 19779/09, 20397/09, 20828/09, 22334/09, 22528/09, 25906/09, 25965/09, 26010/09, 26674/09 and 45691/09. 6 .     All the applicants – except those in applications nos. 14681/09, 45691/09 and 47954/09 – complain under Article   14 of the Convention that they have been discriminated against, on the basis of their ethnicity, in the enjoyment of their rights under the Convention. 7 .     All the applicants – except those mentioned in paragraph   6 above and those in application no.   19810/09 – also complain of not having been provided with an effective remedy in respect of their various complaints, as required by Article 13 of the Convention. 8 .     Relying on Article   2 of the Convention, the applicants in applications nos.   8090/09, 8104/09, 8121/09, 8129/09, 8133/09, 8135/09, 8145/09, 8153/09, 8154/09, 8168/09, 8180/09, 8182/09, 8202/09, 8204/09, 8228/09, 8233/09, 8237/09, 8239/09, 8240/09, 8262/09, 8375/09, 8525/09, 8538/09, 8603/09, 8912/09, 9089/09, 9239/09, 9891/09, 16574/09, 17296/09, 19795/09 and 47954/09 complained, in generic terms and without submitting evidence regarding the extent to which they or their relatives had been affected, about the active phase of hostilities and (i)   the alleged risk to their relatives’ and their own lives during the hostilities between 8   and 12   August 2008; (ii)   the injuries allegedly received during that period; and/or (iii)   the death of relatives. 9 .     The substance of the complaints under Article 2 of the Convention (see paragraph   8 above) was also raised under Article   3 of the Convention in applications nos.   8135/09, 8153/09, 8204/09, 8538/09, 8603/09, 8799/09, 8912/09, 8989/09, 8996/09, 9000/09, 9218/09, 9239/09, 9891/09, 9913/09, 10046/09, 10341/09, 17296/09, 19779/09, 19795/09, 20397/09, 20828/09, 22334/09, 22528/09, 25906/09, 25965/09, 26010/09, 26674/09 and 52486/09. Various applicants in the latter group of applications further alleged, without submitting evidence regarding the extent to which they might have been affected, that they had watched their homes burn while fleeing the hostilities. The applicants in application no.   9000/09 also complained of having been detained in poor conditions and having been subjected to ill-treatment during their detention. 10 .     The applicants in applications nos.   8204/09, 8799/09 and 8996/09 complained – without submitting evidence regarding their whereabouts or the extent to which they might have been affected – of having been unlawfully detained at different points in time in August 2008, in breach of Article   5 of the Convention. The applicants in application no.   9000/09 submitted that they had been detained in Tskhinvali and had been victims of forced labour, in breach of Articles   4 and 5 of the Convention. The first applicant in the same application submitted a poorly legible copy of a detainee identification document issued by the International Committee of the Red Cross to an individual under a different name and year of birth, explaining that he had given a false name at the time, out of fear of reprisals owing to his Ossetian ethnicity. The applicants in application no.   19810/09 complained, under Articles   5 and   7 of the Convention, of the potential risk of detention if they were to return to their village. THE LAW Joinder of the applications 11.     Given their similar factual and legal background, the Court decides that the present fifty-nine applications (see the Appendix) should be joined pursuant to Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court. General considerations 12.     The Court reiterates its findings reached in the inter-State case of Georgia v.   Russia (II) ([GC], no.   38263/08, §§   125-44 and 162-75, 21   January 2021) and in Dzhioyeva and Others v.   Georgia ((dec.), nos.   24964/09, 20548/09 and 22469/09, §§   23-30, 20   November 2018), Naniyeva and Bagayev v.   Georgia ((dec.), nos.   2256/09 and 2260/09, §§   19 ‑ 26, 20   November 2018) and Kudukhova v.   Georgia ((dec.), nos.   8274/09 and 8275/09, §§   21-28, 20   November 2018). Those findings also apply to the present applications, in so far as relevant. Complaints under Articles   8, 13 and   14 of the Convention, Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 and Article   2 of Protocol No.   4 13 .     Relying on Article   1 of Protocol No.   1, all the applicants argue that as a result of the armed conflict, their homes and other property were damaged and/or destroyed. They also complain that they were forced to flee their respective villages and, to date, have been unable to return. 14.     Some of the applicants reiterated their complaint regarding their alleged inability to access their homes and property under Article   8 of the Convention and/or Article   2 of Protocol No.   4 (see paragraph   5 above). 15 .     Furthermore, various applicants complain under Article   13 of the Convention of the absence of an effective domestic remedy for their grievances and under Article   14 of having suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights (see paragraphs   6-7 above). 16 .     In support of their allegations, the applicants provided the Court with various items of prima facie evidence. In particular, the majority of the applicants submitted certificates issued by local authorities indicating their ownership of property. Other applicants submitted extracts from the Public Registry confirming the registration of their respective property rights. One applicant submitted a tenancy agreement in relation to a plot of land. Various other materials were also submitted, such as identification documents indicating residence in the respective villages, confirmation of the status of an internally displaced person, and/or local authorities’ confirmation of residence in the villages concerned. 17.     The relevant provisions relied on by the applicants read as follows: Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 “Every natural or legal person is entitled to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions. No one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by law and by the general principles of international law. ...” Article 8 of the Convention “1.     Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2.     There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.” Article 13 of the Convention “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.” Article 14 of the Convention “The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.” 18.     At the outset, and in so far as the applicants complain regarding the alleged destruction of and/or damage to their property as a result of the hostilities, the Court reiterates its findings in the inter-State case of Georgia v.   Russia (II) (cited above, §   144) that the events which occurred during the active phase of the hostilities (8 to 12 August 2008) did not fall within the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation for the purposes of Article   1 of the Convention. On that basis it declares inadmissible, in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 (a) and 4 of the Convention, this limb of the applicants’ complaints. 19 .     As to the complaints regarding the applicants’ alleged inability to access their homes and property, the Court can accept, on the basis of the prima facie evidence submitted by them (see paragraph   16 above), that the applicants could have been adversely affected by the events of the conflict in question. The relevant circumstances, as described by the applicants, may, according to the Court’s case-law, engage Articles   8, 13 and 14 of the Convention, Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 and/or Article   2 of Protocol No.   4 (see Sargsyan v.   Azerbaijan [GC], no.   40167/06, §§   219-26 and §§   252-61, ECHR 2015, and Georgia v.   Russia (II) , cited above, §§   292-98). 20 .     The Court considers that it cannot, on the basis of the case file, determine the admissibility of the applicants’ complaints relating to their alleged inability to access their homes and property. It is therefore necessary, in accordance with Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, to give notice of this part of the applications (see paragraph   19 above) to the respondent Government. Complaints under Article 5 of the Convention 21.     The Court takes note of the complaints made by several applicants under Article   5 of the Convention (see paragraph   10 above). 22.     It observes that only the first applicant in application no.   9000/09 submitted evidence in support of the allegation of having been detained in Tskhinvali. However, that document indicated a different name and year of birth from those of the applicant concerned. In the absence of any other corroborating evidence, the Court cannot take at face value the applicant’s explanation of his having given a false name to avoid negative repercussions based on his Ossetian ethnicity. The complaint is therefore unsubstantiated and must be rejected as manifestly ill-founded, in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. 23.     As regards the remaining complaints under Article   5, in view of the absence of any evidence to substantiate them, the Court finds them to be manifestly ill-founded. They must likewise be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. Other complaints 24.     The Court takes note of the complaints under Articles   2, 3, 4 and 7 of the Convention raised by several applicants (see paragraphs   8-10 above). 25.     In the light of all the material in its possession, and in so far as the matters complained of are within the Court’s competence, these complaints do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms set out in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. 26.     It follows that this part of the applications is 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 to adjourn the examination of the applicants’ complaints under Article   8 of the Convention, Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 and Article   2 of Protocol No.   4 in so far as their alleged inability to access their homes and property is concerned, and of the complaints under Articles   13 and   14 of the Convention, where relevant; Declares the remainder of the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 18 November 2021.   {signature_p_2}   Hasan Bakırcı   Jon Fridrik Kjølbro   Deputy Registrar   President   Appendix     No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of birth Place of residence before August 2008 Represented by                 8090/09 Jioshvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Mevludi JIOSHVILI 1967 Kurta Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8104/09 Sopio Gogidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Sopio GOGIDZE 1977 Zemo Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8121/09 Gochashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Lavrenti GOCHASHVILI 1950 Kheiti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8129/09 Iveri Gochashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Iveri GOCHASHVILI 1990 Kheiti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8133/09 Chovelidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Ilia CHOVELIDZE 1970 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8135/09 Durglishvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Bagrati DURGLISHVILI 1952 Avnevi Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8145/09 Kakhniashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Kristo KAKHNIASHVILI 1949 Kurta Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili                 8153/09 Bugianishvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Vazha BUGIANISHVILI 1956 Kheiti Village 2. Otari GOCHASHVILI 1949 Kheiti Village 3. Badri GOCHASHVILI 1971 Kheiti Village Mr N. Legashvili                 8154/09 Gherkenashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Teimurazi GHERKENASHVILI 1956 Kurta Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8168/09 Melanashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Nona MELANASHVILI 1971 Kekhvi Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8180/09 Ivane Babutsidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Ivane BABUTSIDZE 1925 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8182/09 Giorgi Babutsidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Giorgi BABUTSIDZE 1965 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8202/09 Givi Babutsidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Givi BABUTSIDZE 1936 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8204/09 Gogidze and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Lova GOGIDZE 1962 Dzartsemi Village 2. Mamuka MAISURADZE 1974 Dzartsemi Village 3. Kakha METREVELI 1974 Dzartsemi Village 4. Mikheil GOGIDZE 1930 Dzartsemi Village 5. Savjenko GUNDISHVILI 1954 Dzartsemi Village 6. Zhenia MAISURADZE 1926 Dzartsemi Village 7. Mania GUNDISHVILI 1979 Dzartsemi Village 8. Sandro GUNDISHVILI 1982 Dzartsemi Village 9. Kakha MAISURADZE 1969 Dzartsemi Village 10. Beglari GOGIDZE 1947 Dzartsemi Village 11. Elo GOGIDZE 1930 Dzartsemi Village 12. Davit GOGIDZE 1961 Dzartsemi Village 13. Khvicha GOGIDZE 1967 Dzartsemi Village 14. Kolia CHOVELIDZE 1960 Dzartsemi Village 15. Tarieli METREVELI 1954 Dzartsemi Village 16. Izolda OTINASHVILI 1940 Dzartsemi Village 17. Aleksandre GOGIDZE 1958 Dzartsemi Village Mr. N. Legashvili             8228/09 Kvrivishvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Tina KVRIVISHVILI 1968 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8233/09 Dali Jioshvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Dali JIOSHVILI 1947 Kurta Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8237/09 Megrelishvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Megi MEGRELISHVILI 1972 Zemo Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8239/09 Lapachi v. Russia 08/02/2009 Nana LAPACHI 1967 Kurta Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8240/09 Marine Kakhniashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Marine KAKHNIASHVILI 1963 Nuli Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8262/09 Zangaladze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Nora ZANGALADZE 1936 Kekhvi Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8375/09 Roin Babutsidze v. Russia 08/02/2009 Roini BABUTSIDZE 1965 Achabeti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8525/09 Khetagashvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Kristo KHETAGASHVILI 1949 Sveri Village 2. Emzar KHETAGASHVILI 1979 Kemerti Village 3. Evgenia PAPELISHVILI 1940 Sveri Village Mr N. Legashvili             8538/09 Shoshitashvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Ramaz SHOSHITASHVILI 1966 Ksuisi Village The applicant died on 4 April 2010; his wife, Tsisana Vazagovi, expressed her wish to pursue the application. 2. Klimenti VAZAGOVI 1948 Ksuisi Village 3. Maia SHERAZADISHVILI 1966 Ksuisi Village   4. Emzar SHOSHITASHVILI 1970 Ksuisi Village   Mr N. Legashvili             8554/09 Mindiashvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Giorgi MINDIASHVILI 1942 Kemerti Village 2. Mania KASRADZE 1958 Kemerti Village 3. Akaki GHERKENASHVILI 1956 Kemerti Village 4. Aleko OTINASHVILI 1980 Kemerti Village 5. Vano OTINASHVILI 1975 Kemerti Village 6. Tamaz KASRADZE 1977 Kemerti Village 7. Nugzar KAULASHVILI 1963 Kemerti Village 8. Roini GHERKENASHVILI 1953 Kemerti Village 9. Nikoloz OTINASHVILI 1948 Kemerti Village 10. Nugzar KASRADZE 1971 Kemerti Village 11. Elguja KASRADZE 1940 Kemerti Village 12. Nukri KASRADZE 1968 Kemerti Village 13. Dali GOCHASHVILI 1956 Kemerti Village 14. Guram OTINASHVILI 1970 Kemerti Village 15. Gela OTINASHVILI 1963 Kemerti Village 16. Khvicha OTINASHVILI 1969 Kemerti Village 17. Jondo KASRADZE 1960 Kemerti Village 18. Rusiko MAGHALDADZE 1930 Kemerti Village 19. Data OTINASHVILI 1954 Kemerti Village 20. Badri GHERKENASHVILI 1966 Kemerti Village 21. Zaza OTINASHVILI 1978 Kemerti Village 22. Rezo KASRADZE 1957 Kemerti Village 23. Zurab OTINASHVILI 1969 Kemerti Village 24. Guram KAULASHVILI 1939 Kemerti Village 25. Zurab KAULASHVILI 1966 Kemerti Village 26. Omar GHERKENASHVILI 1969 Kemerti Village 27. Zurab METREVELI 1969 Kemerti Village Mr N. Legashvili             8603/09 Kakhniashvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 At the material time, all the applicants were residents of the Kekhvi Village   1. Nina KAKHNIASHVILI 1935   2. Nodar KAKHNIASHVILI 1965   3. Nugzar KAKHNIASHVILI 1962   4. Bichiko BLIADZE 1979   5. Malkhaz MELANASHVILI 1962   6. Gusein MELANASHVILI 1938   7. Koba MELANASHVILI 1971   8. Ivane MELANASHVILI 1963   9. Tamar KAPANADZE 1959   10. Kristepore NEBIERIDZE 1965   11. Korneli KAKHNIASHVILI 1941   12. Rezo ZANGALADZE 1929   13. Levan KAKHNIASHVILI 1961   14. Genadi KAKHNIASHVILI 1951   15. Nikoloz MELANASHVILI 1973   16. Mamuka MELANASHVILI 1972 Mr N. Legashvili             8724/09 Terashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Irina TERASHVILI 1958 Beloti Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             8799/09 Shoshitashvili v. Russia 09/02/2009 Revaz SHOSHITASHVILI 1966 Ksuisi Village Ms J. Evans             8912/09 Zubashvili and Others v. Russia 09/02/2009 1. Zaur ZUBASHVILI 1946 Kheiti Village 2. Tamaz KULICHISHVILI 1960 Kheiti Village The applicant died on 19   September 2012; his wife expressed her wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship. 3. Giorgi KULICHISHVILI 1953 Kheiti Village Ms J. Evans             8989/09 Shoshitashvili and Others v. Russia 09/02/2009 1. Revaz SHOSHITASHVILI 1933 Ksuisi Village 2. Opelia SHOSHITASHVILI 1957 Ksuisi Village 3. Ioseb SHOSHITASHVILI 1967 Ksuisi Village The applicant died on 19   September 2012; his wife expressed her wish to pursue the application. Ms J. Evans             8996/09 Askilashvili and Others v. Russia 09/02/2009 1. Ilia ASKILASHVILI 1934 Atsriskhevi Village 2. Gocha ASKILASHVILI 1972 Atsriskhevi Village 3. Jemal VAZAGASHVILI 1952 Atsriskhevi Village 4. Givi ASKILASHVILI 1956 Atsriskhevi Village Ms J. Evans             9000/09 Jioevi and Kakhniashvili v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Aslani JIOEVI 1949 Kekhvi Village 2. Nikolozi KAKHNIASHVILI 1932 Kekhvi Village Ms V. Jijelava             9035/09 Chulukhadze and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Vladimer CHULUKHADZE 1958 Zemo Achabeti Village 2. Roman ZOZIASHVILI 1942 Zemo Achabeti Village 3. Salome KALIASHVILI 1987 Zemo Achabeti Village 4. Jimsheri BABUTSIDZE 1953 Zemo Achabeti Village 5. Bela CHULUKHADZE 1969 Zemo Achabeti Village 6. Bagrat TSERTSVADZE 1982 Zemo Achabeti Village Ms V. Jijelava             9089/09 Davit Babutsidze and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Davit BABUTSIDZE 1978 Kvemo Achabeti Village 2. Elene ROMELASHVILI 1950 Kvemo Achabeti Village 3. Tamar CHULUKHADZE 1971 Kvemo Achabeti Village Ms V. Jijelava             9099/09 Begheluri v. Russia 06/02/2009 Aleksandre BEGHELURI 1930 Disevi Village Ms V. Jijelava             9218/09 Maraneli and Others v. Russia 09/02/2009 1. Tania TASOEVA 1937 Avnevi Village 2. Zaira MARANELI 1954 Avnevi Village 3. Gurgen DURGLISHVILI 1935 Avnevi Village Ms J. Evans             9239/09 Nebieridze and Others v. Russia 09/02/2009 1. Almiza NEBIERIDZE 1936 Kekhvi Village Following the death of the applicant, his daughter expressed her wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship. 2. Nazi BERUASHVILI 1949 Kekhvi Village 3. Suliko MELANASHVILI 1934 Kekhvi Village 4. Merab KASRADZE 1953 Kekhvi Village 5. Malkhaz KAKHNIASHVILI 1959 Kekhvi Village 6. Vladimer KAKHNIASHVILI 1933 Kekhvi Village 7. Koba KAKHNIASHVILI 1968 Kekhvi Village 8. Bidzina KAKHNIASHVILI 1964 Kekhvi Village Ms J. Evans             9465/09 Gherkenashvili and Others v. Russia 06/02/2009 1. Maia GHERKENASHVILI 1972 Kekhvi Village 2. Mzevinar KAKHNIASHVILI 1963 Kekhvi Village 3. Mzia NEBIERIDZE 1964 Kekhvi Village   4. Nodar MELANASHVILI 1957 Kekhvi Village Ms Ts. Javakhishvili             9891/09 Gochashvili v. Russia 11/02/2009 1. Eliko GOCHASHVILI 1952 Kheiti Village 2. Akaki GOCHASHVILI 1951 Kheiti Village Mr N. Legashvili             9913/09 Datashvili and Others v. Russia 13/02/2009 At the material time, all the applicants were residents of the Tamarasheni Village   1. Venera DATASHVILI 1938 Following the death of the applicant, her daughter expressed her wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship.   2. Guram KHETERELI 1934 Following the death of the applicant, his daughter expressed her wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship.   3. Vasil GOGIDZE 1970   4. Gaioz GOGIDZE 1943   5. Ana DATASHVILI 1935   6. Aleksi NASUASHVILI 1928 Following the death of the applicant, his wife expressed her wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship.   7. Eter NASUASHVILI 1928   8. Alexandre DATASHVILI 1965   9. Merab NASUASHVILI 1950   10. Vladimer DATASHVILI 1985   11. Emzari DATASHVILI 1961   12. Dali GIUNASHVILI 1973   13. Tsira DATASHVILI 1948   14. David DZADZAMIA 1977   15. Maia SANAKOEVA 1968   16. Ivane GOGIDZE 1962   17. Zakhar GOGIDZE 1930   18. Kartlos DATASHVILI 1947   19. Valia AIDARASHVILI 1945   20. Koba TABATADZE 1966   21. Levan KUSIANI 1938   22. Davit ELBAKIDZE 1971   23. Lamara OTINASHVILI 1956   24. Guram DATASHVILI 1933   25. Giorgi DATASHVILI 1981 Mr E. Wesselink, Russian Justice Initiative             10046/09 Tsitsiloshvili v. Russia 10/02/2009 Ramaz TSITSILOSHVILI 1955 Vanati Village Ms T. Dekanosidze             10341/09 Beruashvili and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Iason BERUASHVILI 1931 Berula Village 2. Elene BERUASHVILI 1928 Berula Village 3. Mevlud BERUASHVILI 1960 Berula Village 4. Seriozha BERUASHVILI 1957 Berula Village 5. Roland BERUASHVILI 1959 Berula Village 6. Givi BERUASHVILI 1947 Berula Village 7. Gia BERUASHVILI 1960 Berula Village 8. Elguja BERUASHVILI 1955 Berula Village 9. Guram BERUASHVILI 1956 Berula Village 10. Nunu BERUASHVILI 1942 Berula Village 11. Amiran MAISURADZE 1956 Berula Village   12. Tamaz ARCHUADZE 1957 Berula Village   13. Dimitri BERUASHVILI 1942 Berula Village 14. Vepkhia BERUASHVILI 1969 Berula Village 15. Mikheil VAKHTANGASHVILI 1926 Berula Village 16. Giorgi VAKHTANGASHVILI 1958 Berula Village   17. Ia OZGEBISHVILI 1973 Berula Village   18. Maro VAKHTANGASHVILI 1925 Berula Village 19. Nugzar VAKHTANGASHVILI 1950 Berula Village 20. Davit OTINASHVILI 1970 Berula Village   21. Alexander MAISURADZE 1964 Berula Village 22. Nino BERUASHVILI 1945 Berula Village   The case file contains a supplementary list of applicants with additional names. What link these additional names had to the application was not clarified. Ms J. Evans             14681/09 Basishvili v. Russia 10/02/2009 Grigol BASISHVILI 1979 Kurta Village N/A             16518/09 Khaduri and Others v. Russia 20/03/2009 1. Tamara KHADURI 1935 Berula Village The applicant died on 5 July 2013; her grandson expressed his wish to pursue the application. The case-file material does not include any documents demonstrating kinship. 2. Zurabi KHADURI 1987 Berula Village 3. Tariel BERUASHVILI 1957 Berula Village 4. Elnari VAKHTANGASHVILI 1951 Berula Village Ms J. Evans             16574/09 Tsotniashvili v. Russia 20/03/2009 Ivlite TSOTNIASHVILI 1938 Eredvi Village Ms J. Evans             17296/09 Datashvili v. Russia 08/02/2009 Zakaria DATASHVILI 1946 1946 Tamarasheni Village Mr B. Botchorishvili             19779/09 Balashvili v. Russia 12/02/2009 Merab BALASHVILI 1950 Akhalgori N/A             19795/09 Beruashvili v. Russia 02/03/2009 Sonia BERUASHVILI 1927 Berula Village Mr N.   Legashvili             19810/09 Iamze and Zaza Machabelli v. Russia 15/02/2009 1. Iamze MACHABELLI 1963 Tbilisi/Kurta Village 2. Zaza MACHABELLI 1964 Tbilisi/Kurta Village Mr B. Maghradze             20397/09 Merab Beruashvili and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Merab BERUASHVILI 1947 Eredvi Village 2. Beglar BOTSVADZE 1941 Mamisaantubani Village 3. Irma MESHVILDISHVILI 1964 Village Berula 4. Koba BOTSVADZE 1980 Mamisaantubani Village 5. Grunia ODIKADZE 1947 Gori Mr E. Paksadze             20828/09 Kekelishvili and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Tariel KEKELISHVILI 1946 Kheiti Village   2. Guram KULICHISHVILI 1955 Kheiti Village   3. Gela KEKELISHVILI 1960 Kheiti Village   4. Zaza SHERAZADASHVILI 1967 Kheiti Village   5. Mamuka KEKELISHVILI 1971 Kheiti Village Mr E. Paksadze             22334/09 Zangaladze and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Mamuka ZANGALADZE 1974 Kekhvi Village 2. Mamuka NEBIERIDZE 1971 Kekhvi Village 3. Natela NEBIERIDZE 1946 Kekhvi Village 4. Merab ZANGALADZE 1949 Kekhvi Village 5. Teimuraz NEBIERIDZE 1956 Kekhvi Village 6. Ramaz GHONGHADZE 1965 Kekhvi Village 7. Teimuraz KAKHNIASHVILI 1947 Kekhvi Village 8. Otar KAKHNIASHVILI 1949 Kekhvi Village Mr E. Paksadze             22528/09 Nikorashvili v. Russia 17/02/2009 Narimand NIKORASHVILI 1951 Prisi Village Mr E. Paksadze             25906/09 Ketevan Nikolishvili v. Russia 17/02/2009 Ketevan NIKOLISHVILI 1928 Vanati Village Mr E. Paksadze             25965/09 Tchovelidze and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Elizbar TCHOVELIDZE 1963 Dzartsemi Village Georgian 2. Ioseb METREVELI 1960 Dzartsemi Village 3. Vakhtang METREVELI 1931 Dzartsemi Village 4. Zurab METREVELI 1951 Dzartsemi Village 5. Alik TCHOVELIDZE 1977 Dzartsemi Village 6. Goderdzi TCHOVELIDZE 1980 Dzartsemi Village 7. Vazha TCHOVELIDZE 1958 Dzartsemi Village 8. Arsen TCHOVELIDZE 1932 Dzartsemi Village Mr E. Paksadze             26010/09 Guram Otinashvili and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Guram OTINASHVILI 1946 Kemerti Village 2. Teimuraz BERUASHVILI 1958 Kemerti Village 3. Severian KASRADZE 1931 Kemerti Village 4. Tengiz KASRADZE 1949 Kemerti Village 5. Kristo KASRADZE 1947 Kemerti Village 6. Natela METREVELI 1930 Kemerti Village 7. Mikheil KASRADZE 1957 Kemerti Village 8. Vazha KASRADZE 1954 Kemerti Village 9. Morisi GHERKENASHVILI 1970 Kemerti Village 10. Akaki METREVELI 1957 Kemerti Village   11. Ivane OTINASHVILI 1941 Kemerti Village 12. Vaso OTINASHVILI 1977 Kemerti Village 13. Vazha METREVELI 1953 Kemerti Village 14. Jemal METREVELI 1962 Kemerti Village 15. Emzar MINDIASHVILI 1967 Kemerti Village 16. Givi METREVELI 1959 Kemerti Village 17. Anzor KASRADZE 1965 Kemerti Village 18. Zurab KASRADZE 1968 Kemerti Village 19. Gia METREVELI 1974 Kemerti Village 20. Ramaz OTINASHVILI 1987 Kemerti Village 21. Tamaz OTINASHVILI 1956 Kemerti Village 22. Levan OTINASHVILI 1959 Kemerti Village 23. Guram Otinashvili 1946 Kemerti Village   24. Elene ZAALISHVILI 1945 Kemerti Village 25. Leri GHERKENASHVILI 1963 Kemerti Village 26. Parven METREVELI 1939 Gori Georgian   27. Zurab OTINASHVILI 1982 Kemerti Village   28. Temur OTINASHVILI 1992 Kemerti Village   29. Vladimer OTINASHVILI 1925 Kemerti Village   30. Daro MAGHALDADZE 1936 Kemerti Village   31. Elo KASRADZE 1929 Kemerti Village 32. Aleksandre KASRADZE 1954 Kemerti Village   33. Genari KASRADZE 1974 Kemerti Village Mr E. Paksadze             26674/09 Nasuashvili and Others v. Russia 17/02/2009 1. Shalva NASUASHVILI 1972 Tamarasheni Village 2. Mamuka NASUASHVILI 1968 Tamarasheni Village 3. Vera NASUASHVILI 1938 Tamarasheni Village 4. Rusudan GOCHASHVIILI 1985 Tamarasheni Village 5. Jemal MINDIASHVILI 1942 Tamarasheni Village 6. Malkhaz KHUBULOVI 1970 Tamarasheni Village 7. Zurab TCHOVELIDZE 1957 Tamarasheni Village 8. Maia KAKHNIASHVILI 1966 Tamarasheni Village Mr E. Paksadze   45691/09 Maghaldadze v. Russia 22/01/2009 1. Ramin MAGHALDADZE 1980 Kemerti Village 2. Vladimer MAGHALDADZE 1946 Kemerti Village N/A   47954/09 Maruashvili v. Russia 03/08/2009 Liana MARUASHVILI 1959 Ptishi Village N/A   52486/09 Turashvili and Others v. Russia 10/02/2009 1. Tristan TURASHVILI 1943 Argvitsi Village 2. Vakhtang ASKILASHVILI 1930 Argvitsi Village 3. Zuriko MIDODASHVILI 1965 Argvitsi Village 4. Nona GIGUASHVILI 1973 Argvitsi Village 5. Valeri MIDODASHVILI 1954 Argvitsi Village 6. Gia MIDODASHVILI 1962 Argvitsi Village 7. Durmishkhan MIDODASHVILI 1956 Argvitsi Village   8. Vazha MIDODASHVILI 1965 Argvitsi Village 9. Zuriko ROMELASHVILI 1967 Argvitsi Village Ms J. Evans