CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 28 mai 2025

.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 } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .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 } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .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 } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sE55E11EC { width:137.42pt; 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 } .s59272B2C { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; 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 } .s5FFF0A78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:2pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   FIFTH SECTION CASE OF VOVK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (Applications nos. 56675/18 and 8 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 28 May 2025   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Vovk and Others v. Ukraine, The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Diana Sârcu , President ,   Kateřina Šimáčková,   Mykola Gnatovskyy , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 7 May 2025, 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. 4.     The applicants complained of the excessive length of criminal proceedings and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5.     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 6.     The applicants complained that the length of the criminal 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. 7.     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, among many other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v.   France [GC], no.   25444/94, §   67, ECHR   1999 ‑ II, and Frydlender v.   France [GC], no.   30979/96, §   43, ECHR   2000 ‑ VII). 8.     In the leading case of Nechay v. Ukraine (no. 15360/10, 1 July 2021) the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 9.     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. 10.     The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints. 11.     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 12.     The Court makes no award in application no.   56675/18 since the applicant has renounced any compensation. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Bevz v.   Ukraine, no. 7307/05, § 52, 18 June 2009), the Court further considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table to the remaining applicants. 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 criminal proceedings and lack of an effective remedy in that regard; Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, with exception of the applicant in application no.   56675/18, 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 28 May 2025, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Sârcu   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention (excessive length of criminal 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]     56675/18 20/11/2018 Sergiy Volodymyrovych VOVK 1978       13/02/2015   08/04/2021   6 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 27 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction -     1955/24 26/12/2023 Mykola Volodymyrovych PAROVYY 1983       17/12/2013   06/09/2023   9 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 21 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction 2,400     17676/24 26/05/2024 Vitaliy Viktorovych SMETANA 1983   Ignatov Oleksandr Anatoliyovych Dnipro 25/11/2011   pending   More than 13 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 1 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction 4,200     18295/24 05/06/2024 Sergiy Petrovych DZYUBENKO 1975       10/05/2019   pending   More than 5 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 16   day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction 1,800     24165/24 02/08/2024 Oleksandr Mykolayovych TARANENKO 1955   Kazarnovskyy Oleksandr Lvovych Odesa 26/05/2017   11/04/2024   6 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 17   day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction 1,800     24580/24 14/08/2024 Sergiy Petrovych BULKACH 1976       07/04/2014   11/07/2024   10 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 5 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction   2,400     25460/24 17/08/2024 Oleksandr Vasylyovych CHEPORNYUK 1987       25/11/2015   Pending (suspended on 03/05/2023 following the applicant’s conscript to for the military service) More than 7 year(s) and 5 month(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction 1,800     26904/24 23/08/2024 Maksym Olegovych MYRONENKO 1990   Goliver Pavlo Volodymyrovych Kryvyy Rig 05/11/2014   pending   More than 10 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 21 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction 3,000     27355/24 22/08/2024 Illya Oleksandrovych TURKOVSKYY 2001   Romanyuk Ivan Mykolayovych Nova Romanivka 14/01/2018   pending   More than 7 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 12 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction 2,400     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.