CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 juin 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Published on 19 July 2021   THIRD SECTION Application no. 28304/16 Damir Abdullovich NASYROV against Russia lodged on 6 May 2016 communicated on 30 June 2021   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the customs confiscation of four 500-euro notes described as an “indivisible object of the offence” in the absence of any indication that the cash had been acquired by unlawful means or had proceeded from any illegal activities.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention? In particular, what was the legal basis for ordering the confiscation of the physical banknotes rather than an amount of money in excess of what was permissible to carry across the customs border without declaration (see Adzhigovich v. Russia , no. 23202/05, § 32, 8 October 2009)?