CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 décembre 2023

.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 } .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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .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 } .s9F46BEC9 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s46DB5BA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sBD1BE8CC { width:33.89pt; display:inline-block } .s9AA0C774 { width:151.77pt; display:inline-block } .s5D826FD4 { width:25.88pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sD00444C6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s2E584F8C { width:4.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s21713D45 { width:15.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBB07DB2D { width:17.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD48F61B { width:11.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB96D077B { width:10.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBDDA8F2D { width:25.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sAFEF16D9 { width:15.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s525F9A5 { width:4.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD7821266 { width:15.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s452EA0AD { width:17.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sE2E59B15 { width:11.72%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4A1F110C { width:10.52%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sAE0B45D { width:25.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s261F2DDD { width:15.04%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s93B87EE3 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:10pt } .sFA02A319 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sBA32C63A { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 29283/13 Oleksiy Petrovych ZHADAN against Ukraine and 26 other applications The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 14   December 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Carlo Ranzoni , President ,   Mattias Guyomar,   Mykola Gnatovskyy , judges , and Martina Keller, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to: the applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by the applicants listed in the appended table (“the applicants”), on the various dates indicated therein; Having deliberated, decides as follows: SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE 1.     The applicants’ details are set out in the appendix. 2.     The relevant circumstances concerning lack of communication with certain applicants since 24 February 2022 are set out in Bryska and Others v.   Ukraine ((dec.), nos. 11706/13 and 5 others, 2 November 2023 [Committee]). Those circumstances as far as the present applications are concerned and their subject matter are summarised in the appendix. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 3.     The Court finds it appropriate to examine the applications jointly in a single decision. 4.     Bryska and Others concerned cases lodged by the applicants who had their postal addresses in Ukraine and who did not provide the Court with valid functioning email addresses or did not activate an eComms account despite telephone calls informing them of its creation. The Court concluded that, in the particular circumstances described in that decision, such applicants could be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, within the meaning of Article 37   § 1   of the Convention. In making that conclusion, the Court also took into account that repeated attempts to contact the applicants by telephone (where their numbers were available), had been unsuccessful, and that the applicants had not contacted the Court for considerable periods of time despite the fact that it must have been obvious to them that the full ‑ scale military attack launched by the Russian Federation against Ukraine on 24 February 2022 disrupted the Court’s communication with them and should have prompted them to contact the Court with a view to establishing an effective channel of communication and thus ensure that the applications could be duly processed. 5.     The Court notes that similar considerations are applicable to the present applications and, therefore, the circumstances justify striking them out of its list. 6.     Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1   in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the applications listed in the appendix. 7.     Finally, the Court once again reiterates, as it did in Bryska and Others , that under Article 37 § 2 of the Convention it may decide to restore an application to its list of cases if it considers that the circumstances justify such a course. 8.     In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.   For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.   Done in English and notified in writing on 18 January 2024.     Martina Keller   Carlo Ranzoni   Deputy Registrar   President Appendix List of cases: No. Application no. Case name Introduction date Applicant’s name Year of birth Place of residence Nationality Representative’s name Location (where relevant) Latest letter from the applicant received on Main complaints raised Other information 1. 29283/13 Zhadan v.   Ukraine 22/04/2013 Oleksiy Petrovych ZHADAN 1982 Pidgorne Ukrainian   25/09/2018 Art. 6 that the domestic bodies dealing with the applicant’s case lacked independence and impartiality; Art. 8 alleged violation of the right to respect for private life because of dismissal; Art.   10 alleged punishment for unintentional miscarriage of justice; Art. 13. lack of effective domestic remedies eComms not activated 2. 24673/15 Mykhalyova v. Ukraine 08/05/2015 Lidiya Ivanivna MYKHALYOVA 1958 Odesa Ukrainian Artem Valeriyovych PYTOMETS Odesa 15/05/2015 Art. 8 on account of the outcome of defamation proceedings instituted by the applicant against an individual and a journalist eComms not activated by the applicant’s representative No valid email address of the applicant 3. 45939/15 Garashchenko v.   Ukraine 08/09/2015 Viktor Vasylyovych GARASHCHENKO 1947 Lviv Ukrainian   17/09/2015 Art. 13 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the State’s failure to comply with its positive obligations and ensure the applicant’s right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions No valid email address 4. 47978/15 Zhdanov v. Ukraine 21/09/2015 Volodymyr Volodymyrovych ZHDANOV 1990 Komunist Ukrainian   16/03/2017 Art. 1, 5, 8, 2 - complaint concerning the military draft in Ukraine. Art. 6 and 13 - complaint concerning the outcome of an employment dispute No valid email address 5. 53148/15 Moskalenko v.   Ukraine 12/10/2015 Olena Dmytrivna MOSKALENKO 1986 Kyiv Ukrainian   22/10/2015 Art. 13 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 about unlawful inference with property rights and absence of effective remedies in this respect No valid email address 6. 60865/15 Kovalchuk v.   Ukraine 26/11/2015 Tamara Petrivna KOVALCHUK 1968 Zhytomyr Ukrainian   08/12/2015 Art. 6 about the non-enforcement of a domestic judgment; Art. 13 about the absence of effective remedies; Art. 1 of Protocol 1 about the inability to obtain compensation for a house located in a radiation-contaminated area No valid email address 7. 1529/16 Reka v. Ukraine 28/12/2015 Tetyana Dmytrivna REKA 1979 Zhmerynka Ukrainian   07/01/2016 Art. 6 of the Convention - complaint about outcome of the applicant’s employment dispute with a state authority No valid email address 8. 5074/16 Zabrodskyy v.   Ukraine 15/01/2016 Vasyl Ivanovych ZABRODSKYY 1966 Chernivtsi Ukrainian   15/01/2016 Art. 6 about a violation of the legal certainty principle in civil proceedings eComms not activated 9. 11612/16 Zinaida Volobuyeva and Anna Volobuyeva v.   Ukraine 06/11/2010 Zinaida Petrovna VOLOBUYEVA 1955 Gurzuf Ukrainian Aleksandr Vladimirovich LESOVOY Simferopol 06/11/2010 Art. 6 about a violation of the legal certainty principle No valid email address 10. 25583/16 Karatsyuba v.   Ukraine 28/04/2016 Sergiy Oleksiyovych KARATSYUBA 1968 Komsomolsk Ukrainian   28/04/2016 Art. 8 and 13 concerning the applicant’s inability to modify information in a State register No valid email address 11. 29785/16 Redaktsiya gazety Trudovaya Slava, KP v.   Ukraine 16/05/2016 REDAKTSIYA GAZETY TRUDOVAYA SLAVA, KP 2003 Orekhov Ukrainian Igor Arturovich VORON Kamyamnske 26/05/2016 Art. 10 complaint that the applicant was ordered by the courts to retract information which it had published No valid email address 12. 32095/16 Spektrgaz, TOV v.   Ukraine 25/05/2016 SPEKTRGAZ, TOV 2014 Lviv Ukrainian Stanislav Olegovych LOZYTSKYY Lviv 03/06/2016 Art. 6 complaint that the applicant company could not lodge its appeal in cassation on time because it belatedly received a decision of a court of appeal; Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1, Art. 6 and 13 - complaint about the outcome of the applicant’s dispute with a State-owned company The applicant’s representative, whose email address is available, informed the Court that he no longer represented the applicant. The applicant company’s telephone number does not respond, no other contact details are available 13. 39481/16 Gaydak v. Ukraine 22/06/2016 Nataliya Volodymyrivna GAYDAK 1970 Vyshgorod Ukrainian   29/06/2016 Art. 6, 13 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning length of proceedings and outcome in a dispute over matrimonial property No valid email address 14. 47659/16 Merezha Vidpochynku, Tov v.   Ukraine 05/08/2016 MEREZHA VIDPOCHYNKU, TOV Lviv Ukrainian Anton Mykolayovych PODILCHAK Lviv 12/08/2016 Art. 6, renewal of the limitation period for the prosecutor’s claim without proper legal grounds; Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1, invalidation of the applicant’s title to property it had bought from the State eComms not activated 15. 54969/16 Li v. Ukraine 07/09/2016 Bronislav Alekseyevich LI 1963 Nerubayske Ukrainian Aleksandr Innokentyevich PAK Odesa 07/09/2016 Art. 6 § 2 regarding the alleged breach of presumption of innocence eComms not activated 16. 56246/16 Bvk Ltd, TOV v.   Ukraine 13/09/2016 BVK LTD, TOV 1992 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian   13/09/2016 Art. 6 about alleged denial of access to a court eComms not activated 17. 62181/16 Burdylo v. Ukraine 21/10/2016 Yuriy Viktorovych BURDYLO 1976 Dnipro Ukrainian   25/10/2016 Art. 6 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 about fairness and outcome of customs offence proceedings No valid email address 18. 72968/16 Tkachenko v.   Ukraine 26/11/2016 Oleg Mykolayovych TKACHENKO 1975 Zolotonosha Ukrainian   03/06/2021 Art. 6 §§ 1 and 3(d) concerning alleged breach of the right to fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal, sufficiency of reasons for conviction and the right to question witnesses in a case concerning an administrative offence eComms not activated 19. 15274/17 Yesipchuk v.   Ukraine 17/02/2017 Maksim Vasilyevich YESIPCHUK 1987 Mykolayiv Ukrainian Larisa Petrovna YESIPCHUK 1962 Mykolayiv Ukrainian   17/02/2017 Art. 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 13, 14, 34, and Art.1 of Protocol No.1 about alleged ill-treatment, unlawful detention, search and seizure of property, and allegedly unfair trial eComms account not activated 20. 50532/17 Zelinskyy v.   Ukraine 06/07/2017 Oleksandr Valeriyovych ZELINSKYY 1989 Odesa Ukrainian   06/09/2018 Art. 3 about ineffective investigation into the applicant’s poisoning in a car of his acquaintance, K. Art.   6 - no opportunity to file a civil claim against K. No valid no email address 21. 69495/17 Sizonenko v.   Ukraine 13/09/2017 Lyubov Antonivna SIZONENKO 1935 Bila Tsekrva Ukrainian   20/09/2017 Art. 13 (and Art. 3 raised in substance) about ill-treatment inflicted by a private person in front of police officers No valid email address 22. 79423/17 Bulyna v. Ukraine 07/11/2017 Mykhaylo Mykhaylovych BULYNA 1967 Uzhgorod Ukrainian   16/11/2017 Art. 6 about fairness of criminal proceedings, notably right to a lawyer No valid email address 23. 7405/18 Slyvka v. Ukraine 26/01/2018 Galyna Mykolayivna SLYVKA 1958 Kyiv Ukrainian   26.01.2018 Art. 2 and 13 regarding the alleged lack of medical treatment in detention which led to the death of the applicant’s son eComms not activated 24. 7664/18 Svitlichnyy v.   Ukraine 26/01/2018 Yuriy Viktorovych SVITLICHNYY 1958 Zaporizhzhya Ukrainian   06/02/2018 Art. 6, 13 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 about reasoning of court decisions, fairness and outcome of proceedings in a pension case No valid email address 25. 18093/18 Pozhyvotko v.   Ukraine 10/10/2018 Mariya Mykolayivna POZHYVOTKO Nosivka Ukrainian   19/09/2019 Art. 2 allegedly ineffective investigation into the death of the applicant’s son caused by acts of private individuals No valid email address 26. 20114/18 Kirgizova v.   Ukraine 16/04/2018 Olena Vasylivna KIRGIZOVA 1962 Lviv Ukrainain   01/08/2018 Art. 6, 13 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 about reasoning of court decisions, fairness and outcome of proceedings in a civil case eComms account not activated 27. 29011/18 Moskovoy v.   Ukraine 09/06/2018 Oleg Borysovych MOSKOVOY 1967 Kyiv Ukrainian   19/06/2018 Art. 5 unlawfulness and unreasonable length of pre-trial detention in 2008-2013; Art. 2 of Protocol No. 4, Art. 6 about length of obligation not to abscond (2014 ‑ 2018); Art. 13 lack of effective remedy in their respect No valid email address