CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 novembre 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify }   Published on 22 November 2021   THIRD SECTION Application no. 13041/21 Adam Dadashevich ALKHANOV against Russia lodged on 3 March 2021 communicated on 2 November 2021   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the demolition in July 2014 of the applicant’s building located at Kalanchakskaya Street in Urus-Martan (Chechnya) (facts related to Malsagov and Aldamov v.   Russia [Committee], nos.   59079/17 and 10299/18, 6   July 2021). While the applicant’s title to the building and the fact of its demolition had not been contested, the civil courts dismissed his action for damages against the municipality considering that the involvement of the authorities had not been proven. The police refused to institute criminal proceedings as they had not discerned the corpus delicti in the demolition of the building; the applicant complained under Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to no avail.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     (i)     Was there an interference with the applicant’s right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions, within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol   No. 1 to the Convention? (ii)     Was it “subject to the conditions provided for by law” (see, mutatis mutandis , Salamov v.   Russia , no.   5063/05, §§   36, 39-42, 45-46, 12   January 2016; Abiyev and Palko v.   Russia , no.   77681/14, §§   58-67, 24   March 2020; Dakhkilgov v.   Russia , no.   34376/16, §§   44-50, 8   December 2020)? (iii)     What legitimate aim did the demolition serve? (iv)     Did the demolition place a disproportionate burden on the applicant, incompatible with Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention?   2.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy as required by Article   13 of the Convention for the alleged violation of his rights under Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention?   3.     The Government is requested to submit the preliminary investigation file ( материалы доследственной проверки ) conducted in connection with the applicant’s request to institute criminal proceedings and any other documents related to the demolition of the buildings located at Kalanchakskaya Street in Urus-Martan as well as to indicate what is situated now at the place of the demolished buildings.