CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 5 septembre 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .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 } .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 } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sAB95A5CB { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; 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 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }     FIFTH SECTION CASE OF BURDA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (Application no. 43007/13 and 11 others – see appended list)           JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 5 September 2024       This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Burda and Others v. Ukraine, The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Carlo Ranzoni , President ,   Mārtiņš Mits,   María Elósegui , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 11 July 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     The Ukrainian Government (“the   Government”) were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 4.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE   6 § 1 AND   ARTICLE   13 OF THE CONVENTION 5.     The applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Article   6   §   1 and Article   13 of the Convention. 6.     The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v.   France [GC], no.   30979/96, §   43, ECHR 2000-VII). 7.     In the leading case of Karnaushenko v. Ukraine (no. 23853/02, 30   November 2006), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 8.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement. 9.     The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 and of Article   13 of the Convention. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 11.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Karnaushenko , cited above, §§ 70 and 75), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   6 § 1 and Article   13 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law; Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)   that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 5 September 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Carlo Ranzoni   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Start of proceedings End of proceedings Total length Levels of jurisdiction Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros) [1]     43007/13 19/06/2013 Petro Oleksiyovych BURDA 1960       25/09/2008   26/11/2014   6 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 2 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   500     26114/19 08/05/2019 Volodymyr Semenovych GAVRILYEV 1942   Kucherenko Denys Sergiyovych Zaporizhzhya 16/08/2005   11/06/2020   14 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 27   day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   5,400     45145/19 15/08/2019 Sergiy Mykolayovych SVISHCHOV 1956   Kucherenko Denys Sergiyovych Zaporizhzhya 19/08/2005   11/06/2020   14 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 24   day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   5,400     45809/22 05/09/2022   AND   21818/23 30/04/2023 Oleksandr Eduardovych KIROV 1968           10/08/2014         07/08/2014 21/04/2022 (decision received on 10/05/2022)     13/12/2022 7 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 12 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   8 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 7 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction 1,600     2613/23 05/12/2022 Yosyp Vasylyovych YATSENKO 1962       05/03/2014   pending   More than 10 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 21   day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   2,400     11608/23 18/02/2023 Sergiy Volodymyrovych KHALEPA 1979       20/07/2015 25/12/2019   11/05/2016 09/11/2023   4 year(s) and 8 month(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction   1,200     17637/23 04/04/2023 Olga Volodymyrivna MYKHAYLYSHYNA 1989   Ignatov Oleksandr Anatoliyovych Dnipro 30/09/2017   pending   More than 6 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 27 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction   1,700     32549/23 10/08/2023 Vitaliy Valeriyovych CHERNOV 1972   Romanyuk Valeriy Illich Chernivtsi 13/07/2018   13/04/2023   4 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 1 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction   1,200     33400/23 17/08/2023 Tetyana Sergiyivna KRATKO 1990   Pavlyshyn Yuriy Mykolayovych Odesa 14/12/2017 13/03/2020   24/09/2019 27/04/2023   4 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 26   day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction   800   34135/23 24/08/2023 Vitaliy Mykhaylovych PRASLOV 1969       12/05/2020   pending   More than 4 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 14 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction   1,200   35403/23 14/09/2023 Sergiy Pavlovych VOLOCHAY 1960       22/02/2019   15/05/2023   4 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 24 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction 800   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.