CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 novembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s2278F906 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:21.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s901B8D2A { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; list-style-position:inside } .s97296F0 { width:0.81pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block }   Communicated on 10 November 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no. 9430/06 Natalya Vladimirovna TUPITSINA against Russia and 2 other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicants in the present three cases are three Russian nationals. Their names and years of birth are tabulated below. They live in different regions of Russia. The first and the third applicants are represented before the Court by Ms S.R.   Mukhambetova, a lawyer practising in Yekaterinburg. The circumstances of the case The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. The applicants sued different municipal companies, referred to in the Appendix as the “debtor companies”. These companies were incorporated as municipal unitary enterprises and provided a wide range of services in the respective municipal districts in several regions of Russia. On the dates tabulated below domestic courts made pecuniary awards in the applicants’ favour, to be paid by the debtor companies. Particulars of each judgment are summarised in the appended table. On the dates listed in the Appendix the awards became enforceable. It appears that the final judicial decisions in the applicants’ favour have remained unenforced. COMPLAINT Relying on Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicants complain about non-enforcement of court awards in their favour.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has the complaint regarding the non-enforcement of the final judgments in the applicants’ favour been introduced within six months, as required by Article   35   §   1 of the Convention? In particular, was the decision to discontinue the insolvency proceedings published, in accordance with Article   28   §   3 and Article   57   §   1 of Federal Law no.   127-FZ of 26   October 2002 “On insolvency (bankruptcy)”? If so, when and where? Were the applicants informed of that decision by any other means?       Appendix   No. Application No. Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Debtor company Insolvency proceedings started and ended on Judgement by Date of the judgement Its entry into force Award   9430/06 13/01/2006 Natalya Vladimirovna TUPITSINA 26/05/1971 Kurgan   FGUP Kurganpribor 01/2004 – 27/06/2005   Justice of the Peace of the 44th Court Circuit of the city of Kurgan of the Kurgan Region   28/04/2005 12/05/2005 Salary arrears and non ‑ pecuniary damage   4772/09 19/11/2008 Eduard Vladimirovich RUDNEV 12/02/1966 Pervouralsk, Sverdlovsk Region MUP Zhilishchno-ekspluatatsionniy trest no.   3 Sverdlovsk Regional Court 09/08/2007 09/08/2007 Reinstatement at work   29800/16 13/01/2006 Lyudmila Pavlovna BABOSHINA 15/09/1946 Kurgan   FGUP Kurganpribor 01/2004 – 27/06/2005   Justice of the Peace of the 44th Court Circuit of the city of Kurgan of the Kurgan Region   28/04/2005 12/05/2005 Salary arrears and non ‑ pecuniary damage