CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 5 décembre 2019

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s829ABBD9 { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-top:11.35pt; padding-bottom:10.98pt; vertical-align:middle } .s598389FB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s2D33099A { font-size:7.33pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s22F01CEB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-18pt } .s37D58556 { width:14.67pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .sC7C396CD { width:24.89pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s90A93616 { width:27.66pt; display:inline-block } .s421F9159 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .sE4E38D5F { width:23.77pt; display:inline-block } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sB2A0F2B6 { font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sE188E4CB { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse; } .sF29177A6 { height:1pt } .s4E34B50A { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s5D4AEFA0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:115%; font-size:8pt } .s1C2B10C2 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s782F68DE { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sDD8F0D07 { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s4D651073 { height:20pt } .s4CDBBA1E { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s85065717 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:10pt; line-height:115%; padding-left:6.33pt; font-size:8pt } .sB7FB9D9B { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .s70B41AB9 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .sE4C95D7A { height:21.05pt } .s2E75D7A { height:20.95pt } .s78FC263B { height:21.2pt } .s96FB263B { height:20.8pt } .s4125D7A { height:20.45pt } .sE6F134B3 { margin-left:16.12pt; margin-bottom:10pt; line-height:115%; padding-left:1.88pt; font-size:8pt } .s4355D7A { height:20.75pt } .s55601073 { height:21pt } .s3D45D7A { height:20.65pt } .s2A77B0A7 { height:19.85pt } .sE52A5D7A { height:21.15pt } .s790D6B17 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .s256014D3 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } .s309031D4 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:bottom } Resolution CM/ResDH(2019)329 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 33 cases against Russian Federation   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 December 2019 at the 1362 nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the final judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases (see list in Appendix 2) and to the violations established;   Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:   -           of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and -           of general measures preventing similar violations;   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;   Having noted that the just satisfaction, where awarded, has been paid by the government of the respondent State and that all domestic judicial decisions have been enforced (see Appendix 3);   Noting with satisfaction the general measures adopted by the Russian authorities in respect of the problem of delayed enforcement of domestic judicial decisions imposing on the State obligations to provide housing to several categories of population (see Appendix 1);   Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof. Appendix 1   Information about the measures to comply with the judgments   I.   Case summaries   These cases concern the violation of the applicants’ right to access to court and the right to enjoyment of possessions due to the authorities’ failure to enforce or serious delay in enforcing domestic judgments ordering them to provide the applicants with housing (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1). The applicants in these cases had obtained judicial decisions to provide them with housing due to their status as acting or retired judges, as former participants in the Chernobyl cleaning-up operations, or as members of categories of persons entitled by law to State-funded housing by law. In a number of these cases, the Court also found a lack of an effective remedy in respect of the non-enforcement of the judicial decisions (violation of Article 13).   Other violations: In the Sypchenko case, the Court also found a violation on account of the quashing of a final and binding judicial decision in supervisory review proceedings (violations of Article 6, paragraph 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).   II.   Individual measures   In all cases in which the European Court awarded just satisfaction, the relevant sums were paid to the applicants or their representatives under conditions accepted by them (see Appendix 3) .   As regards the enforcement of domestic judicial decisions, in all cases where a domestic judicial decision in the applicant’s favour was pending enforcement at the time of the adoption of the judgment by the European Court, that decision has been subsequently enforced.   As regards the case concerning a quashing of a final judicial decision in the applicant’s favour in supervisory review proceedings, the violation found was of a procedural nature and did not require a reopening of the domestic proceedings. Indeed, the applicant does not appear to have sought it.   Against this background, no other individual measures appear to be necessary.   III.   General measures   A.   Measures taken in response to the violations of Article 6, paragraph 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1   Members of the judiciary have been provided with State-funded housing in the framework of a special-purpose federal programme “Development of Russia’s judicial system” since 2013. For example, pursuant to Federal Law no. 459-FZ of 29 November 2018 (amended as of 18 July 2019) “On the Federal Budget for 2019 and for the Planned Period of 2020 and 2021”, RUB 750.9 million (approximately 10.6 million euros) are envisaged for 2019-2021 for allocation of subsidies for purchasing living premises by those employees of the courts and of the Judicial Department at the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and its territorial bodies, who are in need of improvement of their living conditions.   Former participants in the Chernobyl cleaning-up operations, as well as other persons entitled to State-funded housing by law, have been provided with housing since 2007 in the framework of a special-purpose federal programme “Housing”. By 2016, the number of unexecuted judicial decisions awarding housing to the above-mentioned former participants in the cleaning-up operations dropped to ten per cent of all such awards.   More generally, Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation no. 1710 of 30 December 2017 (amended as of 11 September 2019) “On Approval of the State Programme “Providing Nationals of the Russian Federation with Affordable and Comfortable Housing and Utility Services”” allocated substantial amounts of funds progressively increasing each year: from RUB 231.8 billion (approximately 3.3 billion euros) in 2019 to RUB 358,9 billion (approximately 5.1 billion euros) in 2025.   Since the problem of non-enforcement at issue was mostly related to the lack of funds, the amounts allocated should ensure that all relevant decisions are from now on enforced in a timely manner.   B.   Measures taken in response to the violations of Article 13   1.   Compensatory remedy   The 2010 Compensation Act (“On Compensation for Violation of the Right to a Trial within a Reasonable Time or the Right to Enforcement of a Judgment within a Reasonable Time”), which was adopted by the Russian Federation in response to the Burdov (No.2) pilot judgment, entitles a party concerned to bring an action for compensation of the violation of his or her right to enforcement within a reasonable time of a judgment establishing a debt to be recovered from the State budgets.   However, the provisions of this Act, as originally adopted, did not cover cases of delayed enforcement of obligations in kind, as a result of which the European Court adopted the Gerasimov and Others pilot judgment. In response to that judgment. On 19 December 2016 the Russian Federation adopted a federal law amending the 2010 Compensation Act, thus extending the right to obtain compensation for the lack of speedy enforcement of domestic judicial decisions concerning the State’s pecuniary obligations in kind, at issue in the present group of cases . The law entered into force on 1 January 2017.   2.   Acceleratory remedies   a) The power to order punitive damages was introduced to the Civil Code on 1 June 2015 (Article 308.3). The courts can award such damages against a debtor who has failed to comply in due time with his or her obligations in kind. These damages can also be awarded against public or municipal bodies and will thus serve as an additional remedy in cases of delayed enforcement of the kind of obligations which are at issue in these cases. The issues related to application of Article 308.3 of the Civil Code in judicial practice have been resolved by Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No.7 of 24 March 2016 “On Courts’ Application of Particular Provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation Regarding Liability for Violation of Obligations”.   b) The Code of Administrative Procedure (“the CAP”) adopted on 8 March 2015 provides for the examination of, inter alia , complaints arising out of lengthy non-enforcement of judicial decisions. In particular, the following elements have been provided for: a more active role of the courts; redistribution of the burden of proof with the obligation on state authorities to provide documents and materials related to the alleged violation; penal sanctions for failure to provide materials to the court without valid reasons; participation in the proceedings of the body whose officials have committed the alleged violations and/or the body vested with the powers for elimination thereof; possibility for the court to apply preventive protection measures including interim measures; benefit schemes for payment of court duties; accelerated examination of administrative cases; possibility to deliver special decisions aiming at elimination of violations of the law established, etc.   The legal positions aimed at increasing the effectiveness of execution of court judgments imposing pecuniary and/or non-pecuniary obligations on state authorities, local self-government authorities and their officials are formulated in the Plenum Ruling of the Supreme Court no. 50 of 17 November 2015 “On Courts’ Application of the Law during Consideration of Some Issues Emerging in the Course of Enforcement Proceedings” and are also reflected in the “Review of Judicial Practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation” No. 1 (2018).   3.   Assessment of the remedies   At its 1288 th meeting (June 2017) (DH) the Committee examined the execution of the pilot judgment Gerasimov and Others concerning delayed enforcement of domestic judicial decisions imposing on the State obligations in kind. In its decision adopted at that meeting, the Committee welcomed the setting up of the aforementioned compensatory remedy and the acceleratory remedy provided for by the Civil Code deeming them prima facie effective, and closed its examination of the part concerning the adoption of remedies (see point 3 of the decision).   C.   Publication and dissemination   The judgments of the European Court were translated, published and disseminated to all the authorities concerned, often with explanatory notes and recommendations.   D.   Other violations found   The general measures in response to the finding of violations on account of the quashing of final domestic judicial decisions in supervisory review proceedings have been taken in the context of the Ryabykh group of cases, the supervision of which was closed by the Committee of Ministers with Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2017)83.   IV.   Conclusion   The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences of the violations of the Convention found by the European Court in these cases and that these measures will prevent similar violations in future. The Russian Federation has, therefore, complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Appendix 2   List of cases     Application     Case   Judgment of   Final on 35259/04 KUKSA 15/06/2006 15/09/2006 25749/05 ANTONOVA 25/09/2008 26/01/2009 12239/03 BABYNIN 25/07/2017 25/07/2017 32048/03 BEZZOUBIKOVA 10/02/2009 10/05/2009 5950/04 BLINOV AND BLINOVA 30/04/2009 06/11/2009 35786/04 BOLOTINY 16/07/2015 16/07/2015 24229/03 BRAGA, TIMOFEYEV AND KIRYUSHKINA 06/03/2008 29/09/2008 24086/04 BULYCHEVY 08/04/2010 04/10/2010 2109/07+ BUTENKO AND OTHERS 20/05/2010 20/08/2010 40075/03 DREVAL AND OTHERS 02/05/2013 02/05/2013 12541/05 IVAN NOVIKOV 03/04/2008 29/09/2008 29063/05 KARDASHIN AND OTHERS 23/10/2008 23/01/2009 26365/05 KAZANTSEVA 23/10/2008 23/01/2009 2746/05 KOPNIN AND OTHERS 28/05/2014 28/08/2014 26089/02 KORNEV 28/09/2006 28/12/2006 18557/06 LYKOV 12/07/2007 12/10/2007 26216/07 LYUBOV STETSENKO 17/04/2014 17/07/2014 5271/05 LYUDMILA DUBINSKAYA 04/12/2008 04/03/2009 21074/03 MAKAROV 25/01/2007 25/04/2007 41302/02 MALINOVSKIY 07/07/2005 07/10/2005 3344/04 MAYAMSIN 27/03/2008 29/09/2008 7363/04 MIKRYUKOV 08/12/2005 08/03/2006 9253/06 MIZYUK 12/04/2007 12/07/2007 6859/02 NAGOVITSYN 24/01/2008 24/04/2008 38103/05 NEVOLIN 12/07/2007 31/03/2008 38029/05 PRIVALIKHIN 12/05/2010 12/08/2010 38918/02 SHAROV 12/06/2008 12/09/2008 703/02 SHILOV AND BAYKOVA 29/06/2006 29/09/2006 17701/03 SITNITSKIYE 12/06/2008 12/09/2008 38368/04 SYPCHENKO 01/03/2007 01/06/2007 13910/04 TARASOV 28/09/2006 12/02/2007 18762/06 TELYATYEVA 12/07/2007 12/10/2007 11931/03 TETERINY 30/06/2005 30/09/2005   Appendix 3   List of payment of just satisfaction and of enforcement of domestic judicial decisions   No. App. Case Judgment final on Sums awarded by the Court (in EUR, unless specified otherwise) Payment deadline Date of payment of the sums awarded by the Court     Payment of default interest   Enforcement of the domestic judicial decision at the origin of the violation Pecuniary damage Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses   35259/04 Kuksa 15/09/2006 3,900 - 66 15/12/2006 07/12/2006   n/a   Enforced   25749/05 Antonova 26/01/2009 - 3,900 - 26/04/2009 28/04/2009   Not significant (EUR 1.92 not paid)     Enforced   12239/03 Babynin 25/07/2017 - 4,200 - 25/10/2017 Paid n/a (lack of bank account details)   Enforced   32048/03 Bezzubikova 10/05/2009 - 3,000 - 10/08/2009 22/01/2010   Paid   Enforced   5950/04 Blinov and Blinova 06/11/2009 - 4,000 500 06/02/2010 15/01/2010         n/a N/a (the applicants withdrew their claims in the course of the supervisory review proceedings)   35786/04 Bolotiny 16/07/2015 390 6,000 - 16/10/2015 07/09/2015   n/a   Enforced   24229/03 Braga, Timofeyev and Kiryushkina 29/09/2008 - 8,600 - 29/12/2008 18/12/2008   n/a   Enforced   24086/04 Bulychevy 04/10/2010 - 3,000 - 04/01/2011 04/05/2011 n/a (bank account details were provided after payment deadline)     Enforced   2109/07 Butenko and Others 20/05/2010 - 16,000 240 20/08/2010 03/12/2010   Paid Enforced   40075/03 Dreval and Others 02/05/2013 - 4,500 - 02/08/2013 29/11/2013 Paid Enforced   12541/05 Ivan Novikov 29/09/2008 - 3,100 - 29/12/2008 18/12/2008   n/a   Enforced   29063/05 Kardashin and Others 23/01/2009 - 10,500 300 23/04/2009 14/04/2009   n/a   Enforced   26365/05 Kazantseva 23/01/2009 - 2,300 - 23/04/2009 17/04/2009   n/a   Enforced   2746/05 Kopnin and Others 28/08/2014 - 3,500 - 28/11/2014 08/10/2014   n/a   Enforced   26089/02 Kornev 28/12/2006 - 3,100 - 28/03/2007 30/03/2007 Not significant (EUR 1.32 not paid)   Enforced   18557/06 Lykov 12/01/2008 - 2,300 - 12/04/2008 29/10/2007   n/a   Enforced   26216/07 Lyubov Stetsenko 17/07/2014 - 6,000 - 17/10/2014 17/12/2014   Paid   Enforced   5271/05 Lyudmila Dubinskaya 04/03/2009 - 1,600 - 04/06/2009 04/09/2009   Paid   Enforced   21074/03 Makarov 25/04/2007 - 3,900 - 25/07/2007 03/08/2007   Paid Enforced   41302/02 Malinovskiy 07/10/2005 - 3,000 - 07/01/2006 02/12/2005   n/a   Enforced   3344/04 Mayamsin 29/09/2008 - 3,900 - 29/12/2008 07/11/2008   n/a   Enforced   7363/04 Mikryukov 08/03/2006 - 4,000 - 08/06/2006 07/06/2006   n/a   Enforced   9253/06 Mizyuk 12/07/2007 - 2,000 - 12/10/2007 28/09/2007   n/a   Enforced   6859/02 Nagovitsyn 24/04/2008 - 2,100 - 24/07/2008 25/06/2008 n/a   Enforced   38103/05 Nevolin 31/03/2008 - 1,200 - 31/07/2008 28/05/2008   n/a   Enforced   38029/05 Privalikhin 12/08/2010 - 2,300 - 12/11/2010 03/12/2010   Paid   Enforced   38918/02 Sharov 12/09/2008 - 3,000 900 12/12/2008 24/10/2008   n/a   Enforced   703/02 Shilov and Baykova 29/09/2006 - 600 - 29/12/2006 27/11/2006   n/a   Enforced   17701/03 Sitnitskiye 12/09/2008 - - - - -   -   Enforced   38368/04 Sypchenko 01/06/2007 - 1,500 - 01/09/2007 27/07/2007   n/a   Enforced   13910/04 Tarasov 12/02/2007 - 2,400 300 12/05/2007 10/04/2007   n/a   Enforced   18762/06 Telyatyeva 12/10/2007 - 1,600 800 12/01/2008 03/12/2007   n/a   Enforced   11931/03 Teteriny 30/09/2005 - 3,000 - 30/12/2005 26/12/2005       n/a Enforcement abandoned due to a subsequent friendly settlement with municipal authorities