CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 septembre 2023

.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 } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 9 October 2023   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 47550/16 OOO STROYSEKTOR and AO YALTINSKAYA KINOSTUDIYA against Russia and 9 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 6 September 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications originate from the conflict between Ukraine and the Russian Federation. They concern the nationalisation by the Russian authorities of the applicants’ real estate located in various parts of Crimea. Between 2004 and 2013 the applicants acquired their titles to land plots, buildings or their parts by either completing the privatisation process pursuant to the decisions of Ukrainian authorities, or by purchasing the respective real estate from their previous owners who had privatised it before. By the time the Russian Federation asserted its jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014 all applicants had registered their full ownership titles under Ukrainian law. In application no.   53159/20 it was not the applicant himself who owned the real estate in question, but a Ukrainian company S. in which he was a shareholder with 29,977% of control. According to the applicant, the Russian authorities barred S. from exercising any activity in Crimea for its failure to re-register under Russian law by 1 March 2015. When the Russian Federation asserted its jurisdiction over Crimea in 2014 all public property that had been nominally owned by the Ukrainian state as well as by regional and local authorities was declared to constitute the property of the Russian authorities pursuant to, in particular, the “Decree of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea of 17 March 2014 on independence of the Republic of Crimea” (hereinafter referred as the “Decree of 17 March 2014”), the “Resolution of the State Council of the Republic of Crimea of 30 April 2014 no.   2085-6/14 on issues of managing the property of the Republic of Crimea” (hereinafter referred as the “Resolution 2085-6/14”), and subsequent normative instruments. The ”Law of the Republic of Crimea no.   38-ZRK of 31 July 2014 on particularities of legal regulation of property and land issues” prescribed, in particular, that the title in land or other property of its previous owner shall cease and the property shall become public property on the day when it is added on the “List of possessions recorded as property of the Republic of Crimea” (hereinafter referred as the “List”), as approved by the Resolution 2085-6/14. At different points in time between 2014 and 2017 the Russian authorities added the applicants’ real estate on the List pursuant to Resolution 2085-6/14 and subsequent amendments thereto. In application no.   2410/17 the applicant organisation was informed by the Russian authorities that its possessions had become public property subject to paragraph   7 of the “Decree of 17 March 2014”, which stated that the property of Ukrainian trade unions which had had no branches in Crimea shall become public. In application no.   59543/19 the applicant company’s real estate was first nationalised pursuant to Resolution 2085-6/14, then the annulment of its title was additionally confirmed by final decisions of Russian courts in a dispute brought against the applicant company by a third-party company, to which the Russian authorities re-allocated its possessions. The applicants in all cases, except application no.   2410/17, resorted to the jurisdiction of the Russian courts and challenged the Resolution 2085-6/14 or its amendments trying to restore their titles. In application no.   53159/20 the applicant brought a claim on his own behalf, seeking restoration of the titles of S. in which he had been a shareholder. All their claims were ultimately rejected. None of the applicants received compensation. Relying on Article   1 of Protocol   No.   1 of the Convention the applicants raise the following complaints against the Russian Federation. They argue that the nationalisation of their real estate in Crimea pursuant to the “Decree of 17 March 2014”, the “Resolution 2085-6/14” or subsequent amendments thereto was arbitrary, did not pursue a legitimate aim and was not provided for by law. Relying on Article   6   §   1 of the Convention, the applicants in applications nos.   56346/16, 2410/17, 7948/18, 22435/18, 60372/19, 53159/20, 26159/21 raise the following complaints against the Russian Federation. In applications nos.   56346/16, 7948/18, 22435/18, 60372/19, 53159/20, 26159/21 the applicants argue that the proceedings before Russian courts to which they had been parties fell short of a fair trial standards. In application no.   2410/17 the applicant organisation argues that it did not have access to court, as Ukrainian courts had no jurisdiction over Crimea after Russia asserted its jurisdiction over it, while Russian courts, according to the applicant organisation, were not independent or impartial. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Have the applicants complied with the admissibility criteria set out in Article   35 of the Convention? 2.     Do the facts to which the applicants refer constitute a violation of Article   1 of Protocol   No.   1 of the Convention? 3.     Did the alleged acts which gave rise to the applicants’ complaints have a basis in “law” within the meaning of the Convention provisions relied on by them? 4.     Did the applicants in applications nos.   56346/16, 7948/18, 22435/18, 60372/19, 53159/20, 26159/21 have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? 5.     Did the applicant organisation in application no.   2410/17 have access to a court for the determination of its civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   APPENDIX List of applications No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Identification of property 1. 47550/16 OOO StroySektor and AO Yaltinskaya Kinostudiya v. Russia 15/07/2016 OOO STROYSEKTOR 2002 Moscow Russian AO YALTINSKAYA KINOSTUDIYA 2014 Yalta Russian Natalya Vladimirovna KORCHUGANOVA 12.8897   ha of land with the Yalta film studio located in Yalta; the land plot was privatised by the Ukrainian predecessor of the second applicant company with its title registered under Ukrainian law on 19   November   2004; the first applicant company is a sole shareholder of the second applicant company, having purchased 100% of shares of its Ukrainian predecessor from a third party on 5   July   2010 2. 56346/16 Rozbudova-Grad, TOV v. Russia 19/09/2016 ROZBUDOVA-GRAD, TOV 2004 Kyiv Ukrainian   Natalya Vladimirovna KORCHUGANOVA 1.4284   ha of land with several buildings, amounting to 6,311.5   sq.   m, located in Yalta, purchased by the applicant company from a third party on 5   March   2005 3. 2410/17 National Writers’ Union of Ukraine v.   Russia 19/12/2016 NATIONAL WRITERS’ UNION OF UKRAINE 1991 Bila Tserkva Ukrainian   1)   “Koktebel” guest house for writers with the complex of buildings located at 110 Lenina Street, Koktebel, Feodosiya, privatised by the applicant organisation with its title registered under Ukrainian law on 9   February   1999 2)   Eight plots of publicly-owned land in Koktebel, Feodosiya, leased to the applicant organisation, and identified as follows: -   no.   1, of 7.8811   ha (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   2, of 258   sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   3, of 108 sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   4, of 147   sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   5, of 33   sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   6, of 114   sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   no.   7, of 80   sq.   m (lease from 3   March 2006 till 2   March   2055) -   1,169   sq.   m of land in Koktebel, Feodosiya (lease from 26   April 2007 till 26 April 2017) 3)   A.P. Chekhov guest house for writers with the complex of buildings located at 7 Managarova Street, Yalta, privatised by the applicant organisation with its title registered under Ukrainian law on 9   February   1999 4)   2.8232 ha of publicly-owned land in Yalta, allowed for the formalisation of use by the applicant organisation on 2   February   2006 4. 7948/18 Ivantsova v.   Russia 03/01/2018 Natalya Leonidovna IVANTSOVA 1969 Simferopol Russian   Two plots of land, of 0.1   ha each, located in Semydvirya village, Alushta, purchased by the applicant from third parties with her titles registered under Ukrainian law on 23   November   2009 5. 22435/18 Vronska and Pustynskyy v. Russia 08/05/2018 Olena Makarivna VRONSKA 1953 Kyiv Ukrainian Valeriy Naumovych PUSTYNSKYY 1953 Kozyn Ukrainian Andrey GOLUBENKO Two plots of land with buildings, identified as follows: -   1,426   sq.   m of land with a resort house of 286.4   sq.   m located in Simeyiz, Yalta, purchased by the applicants in equal shares from a third party with their titles in the land and the house registered under Ukrainian law on 21   January 2010 and 17   December   2012 -   817   sq.   m of land located in Opolzneve village, Yalta, purchased by the first applicant from a third party with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 17   December   2012; on 1   March   2013 the first applicant also registered her title in a house of 336.5   sq.   m constructed on this land plot 6. 29267/19 Nadurak v.   Russia 26/04/2019 Vanda Kazimirovna NADURAK 1935 Kyiv Russian Yevgeniya Viktorovna ZAVATSKAYA Four plots of land with adjacent buildings, located in Opolzneve village, Yalta, identified as follows: -   plot of 1,622   sq.   m, purchased by the applicant from a third party with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 22   September   2010; on 23   June   2011 the applicant also registered her titles in two reconstructed houses, amounting to 1,085   sq.   m, located on this land plot -   no.   2, of 2,146   sq.   m, purchased by the applicant from a third party with her title registered under Ukrainian law on 23   May 2012; on 14   December   2012 the applicant also registered her titles in three houses, amounting to 837.9   sq.   m, constructed on this land plot 7. 59543/19 Tavrida Farm, TOV v. Russia 11/11/2019 TAVRIDA FARM, TOV 2013 Bucha Ukrainian   Two non-residential premises, located at 5   Kyivska/2   Gurzufska Street, Simferopol, and identified as follows: -   6/100 parts of the non-residential premises at the building “B1”, amounting to 106.9   sq.   m, privatised by the applicant company with its title registered on 23   September   2013 -   5/10 parts of the non-residential premises at the building “B”, amounting to 55.0   sq.   m, purchased by the applicant company from a third party with its title registered on 26   December   2013 8. 60372/19 Berezhnyy v. Russia 07/11/2019 Leonid Pavlovich BEREZHNYY 1939 Alushta Russian Andrey Viktorovich LOGINOV 0.1   ha of land located in Semydvirya village, Alushta, purchased by the applicant from a third party with his title registered under Ukrainian law on 17   April   2013 9. 53159/20 Katsubin v.   Russia 11/11/2020 Viktor Ivanovich KATSUBIN 1950 Yevpatoriya Russian   Non-residential building of 9,265.3   sq.   m, located at 45-a Kozlova Street, Simferopol, the title in which was registered with the company S. on 7   October   2005; the applicant was a shareholder with 29,977% of control in S. 10. 26159/21 Dovgyy v.   Russia 21/04/2021 Viktor Oleksandrovych DOVGYY 1953 Kyiv Ukrainian Pavel Aleksandrovich MAKSIMOV 0.4661 ha of land, located in Opolzneve village, Yalta, purchased by the applicant with his title registered under Ukrainian law on 12   September   2006 and re-registered (due to a change of the plot’s size) on 20   October 2011; on 26   February   2010 the applicant also registered his title in a house of 285.4   sq.   m, located on this land plot