CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 11 juillet 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .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 } .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 } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s418B82EF { width:132.42pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .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 }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 82574/17 Volodymyr Ivanovych ZAKUTNIY against Ukraine and 10 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 11 July 2024 as a Committee composed of:   Carlo Ranzoni , President ,   Mārtiņš Mits,   María Elósegui , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, 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 The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings were communicated to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, other complaints based on the same facts were also communicated. THE LAW Joinder of the applications Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings) In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the complaints about the alleged lack of impartiality of the tribunal in the impugned administrative offence proceedings are inadmissible. In particular, the Court notes that the impartiality of the domestic courts was not called into question under either the subjective or the objective tests and that the applicants did not point to any specific circumstances which could cause the Court to doubt the domestic courts’ impartiality (see Figurka v. Ukraine , no. 28232/22, § 30-44, 16 November 2023). Consequently, it cannot be considered that the domestic courts took the role of a prosecuting party or were put in a position requiring them to take the role of a prosecuting party, thereby undermining their impartiality or the fairness of the proceedings. 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. Remaining complaints In applications nos. 347/20, 39421/21 and 48847/21 the applicants raised other complaints under Article 6 of the Convention. The Court has examined these complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 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 5 September 2024.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Carlo Ranzoni   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention (lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Penalty Date of final domestic decision Name of court     82574/17 27/11/2017 Volodymyr Ivanovych ZAKUTNIY 1977   Ignatov Oleksandr Anatoliyovych Dnipro suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH 10,200 31/07/2017, Dnipro Regional Court of Appeal     347/20 09/12/2019 Mykola Mykolayovych TYVONYUK 1983   Fokiy Bogdan Vasylyovych Chernivtsi community service 10/06/2019, Chernivtsi Court of Appeal     35082/20 24/07/2020 Oleksandr Vasylyovych MATVIYCHUK 1983   Yasyk Ivan Olegovych Kryvyy Rig suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH 10,200 30/03/2020, Dnipro Court of Appeal     42152/20 09/09/2020 Sergiy Mykolayovych GRECHKO 1982   Martynenko Yevgen Pavlovych Dnipro suspension of driving licence, administrative fine of UAH, 20,400 14/04/2020 Dnipro Court of Appeal     18694/21 15/03/2021 Oleg Vasylyovych BONDARENKO 1968   Gopkalo Vadym Volodymyrovych Boryspil suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH, 10,200 06/10/2020, Zhytomyr Court of Appeal     39421/21 29/07/2021 Oleg Myroslavovych ONYSKIV 1998   Samulyak Mykhaylo Yuriyovych Ternopil suspension of driving licence, administrative fine of UAH 10,200 16/02/2021 Ternopil Court of Appeal     48847/21 21/09/2021 Vyacheslav Stanislavovych FILONENKO 1998   Rozumovskyy Oleksandr Sergiyovych Kharkiv suspension of driving licence, administrative fine of UAH 10,200, 21/07/2021, Kharkiv Court of Appeal     32126/22 07/06/2022 Viktor Bogdanovych DOVBETA 1969   Parchuk Sergiy Vasylyovych Rivne suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH 17,000 11/02/2022 Rivne Court of Appeal     54654/22 01/11/2022 Lada Anatoliyivna LISHYNA 1964   Kolesnyk Denys Yuriyovych Kryvyy Rig suspension of driving licence, administrative fine of UAH 17,000 01/07/2022 Dnipro Court of Appeal   7945/23 25/01/2023 Ivan Romanovych BOYKO 1982   Samulyak Mykhaylo Yuriyovych Ternopil suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH 17,000 27/09/2022 Ternopil Court of Appeal   11101/23 24/02/2023 Taras Viktorovych DZYAMBA 1990   Samulyak Mykhaylo Yuriyovych Ternopil suspension of driving licence for a year, administrative fine of UAH 17,000 10/11/2022 Ternopil Court of Appeal