CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 janvier 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s54AB6003 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } Published on 5 February 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no.   78109/17 OOO SITI STROY against Russia and 6 other applications (see list appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 11 January 2024, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia. In the enclosed list of applications, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4). For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website . SUBJECT MATTER The applications concern complaints raised under Article 6 § 1 and Article   13 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 relating to non ‑ enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against unitary enterprises (GUPs, MUPs) and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Liseytseva and Maslov v. Russia, nos.   39483/05 and 40527/10, 9   October 2014 and Samsonov v.   Russia (dec.), no. 2880/10, 9   October 2014).   APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article   13 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions given against unitary enterprises (GUPs, MUPs) and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth/registration   Representative’s name and location Relevant domestic decision Start date of non-enforcement period End date of non-enforcement period Length of enforcement proceedings Domestic order (in euros) Relevant details     78109/17 31/10/2017 OOO SITI STROY 2005 Dokka Saydaminovich Itslayev Grozny Ninth Commercial Appellate Court, 22/06/2009   23/10/2009   pending More than 13 year(s) and 11   month(s) and 11   day(s)   EUR 813,831   Judgment debt: RUB 30,878,672 of unpaid contractual debt under a sub-contract agreement for reconstruction and clean-up of debris in Grozny, RUB   4,639,797 of interest, to be paid by the “State Unitary Enterprise Spetsstroy of the Ministry of Construction of the Chechen Republic” (“GUP Spetsstroy”). In 2013, insolvency proceedings were put in place in respect of the GUP, and the applicant company’s claims confirmed by the domestic judgment were included in the register of the GUP’s creditors. In response to its multiple complaints to authorities, the applicant company was on several occasions informed of the impossibility to recover the debt. On 22/11/2021 a first-instance court discontinued the insolvency proceedings (for details concerning the debtor company’s legal status and activities, the sub-contract agreements and the insolvency proceedings, see OOO Truzhenik-89 and OOO Firma Moaz v.   Russia [Committee], nos. 34336/10 and 30108/13, §§1-17, 8 March 2022).     79711/17 07/11/2017 OOO FIRMA IMPULS-A 2002 Dokka Saydaminovich Itslayev Grozny Sixteenth Commercial Appellate Court, 18/07/2013   18/07/2013   pending More than 10 year(s) and 2   month(s) and 16 day(s)   EUR 1,020,749   Judgment debt (arising out of a friendly settlement agreement approved by the domestic court in the final instance): RUB 43,500,000 of unpaid contractual debt under a sub-contract agreement, to be paid by the “State Unitary Enterprise Spetsstroy of the Ministry of Construction of the Chechen Republic” (“GUP Spetsstroy”). The applicant company’s claims were included in the register of the GUP’s creditors. Insolvency proceedings discontinued on 22/11/2021 (for relevant details, see the above-cited OOO Truzhenik-89 and OOO Firma Moaz [Committee]).     3700/18 30/12/2017 Andrey Georgiyevich STRELTSOV 1971 Sergey Borisovich Bogomolov Chelyabinsk Commercial Court of the Bashkortostan Republic, 25/02/2011   05/03/2021   pending More than 2 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 29 day(s)   EUR 52,900   The applicant was the director and legal successor of a private company R. By the final judgment of 26/02/2009 the 18th Commercial Appellate Court ordered the Municipal Unitary Enterprise “Direction of Housing and Communal Services of the Kropachevo Settlement” of the Chelyabinsk Region (МУП « Управление Жилищно-коммунального хозяйства посёлка Кропачево », “the MUP”) to pay the company RUB 1,687,980 of debt for oil products provision, RUB 429,150 in respect of penalty and RUB 22.085.85 in court expenses. On 09/01/2009 the MUP’s founder, the Kropachevo settlement administration, withdrew from the MUP’s the entirety of assets allocated under its economic control; on 07/10/2009 a court declared the MUP insolvent, and the liquidation proceedings started (the liquidator’s subsidiary liability claim against the administration was rejected by the final judgment of 13/12/2010, as the company had already been unprofitable prior to the assets’ withdrawal).Referring to an assignment agreement between R. and the applicant, on 25/02/2011 the Commercial Court of the Chelyabinsk Region ordered to substitute the claimant company in the proceedings by the applicant. On 25/07/2017 the MUP was liquidated.     42490/19 31/07/2019 OOO FGU ROSSTROYEKSPERTIZA 2008 Anton Makeychuk Moscow Federal Commercial Court of the Moscow Circuit, 01/12/2010   01/12/2010   pending More than 12 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 3 day(s)   EUR 2,835,242 Judgment debt: RUB 102,080,488 of unpaid debt under a sub-contract agreement and RUB 14,446,984 of interest, to be paid by the “State Unitary Enterprise Spetsstroy of the Ministry of Construction of the Chechen Republic” (“GUP Spetsstroy”). The applicant company’s claims were included in the register of the GUP’s creditors. Insolvency proceedings discontinued on 22/11/2021 (for relevant details, see the above-cited OOO Truzhenik-89 and OOO Firma Moaz [Committee]).     10179/20 02/02/2020 OOO TAMBOVKONSERV       Commercial Court of the Saratov Region, 26/05/2017   04/06/2017   pending More than   6 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 29 day(s)   EUR 79,134 Judgment debt: RUB 5,027,007.70 in respect of a debt arising out of a failure to perform contractual obligations, penalty and interest. Debtor company: federal state unitary enterprise FGUP “Konservnyy zavod” (“Canned Food Plant”) of the Federal Penitentiary Service; core activity: canned food supply to penal colonies, Russian Guard, Ministry of Interior, Russian Armed Forces). Insolvency proceedings in respect of the debtor opened on 03/04/2018, pending. The insolvency manager lodged a subsidiary liability claim against the Federal Penitentiary Service (the owner of the debtor company’s assets), referring, inter alia, (i) to the owner’s decision to merge the debtor FGUP with two more FGUPs in 2016; and (ii) the owner’s approval of a transaction which it had known had been unenforceable, given the FSIN’s instruction of 28/12/2016 to suspend concluding of State contracts with the debtor until further notice. The claim was rejected by the final judgment of 18/10/2019 of the Supreme Court of Russia.     38321/20 28/07/2020 Choygana Kaldar-oolovna OYUNAROVA 1969 Olga Vladimirovna Artemyeva Kyzyl Kyzyl Town Court, 03/02/2017   04/03/2017   pending More than 6 year(s) and 7 month(s)   EUR 7,500   Judgment debt: RUB 463,738 in salary arrears and compensation, to be paid by the State Unitary Enterprise “Edinaya Regionalnaya Energeticheskaya Sistema” (founder: Ministry of Property and Land Relationships of the Tyva Republic; subordinated to: Ministry of Industry and Energy of the Tyva Republic). The debtor’s core activity: electricity supply to local population. Enforcement proceedings instituted and discontinued in 2018. The applicant’s subsidiary-liability claim was rejected (latest decision: 28/01/2020, cassation, 8th Cassation Court). On 17/04/2020 the debtor GUP was liquidated without a legal successor.     12844/21 15/02/2021 Yekaterina Ochirovna BULKHUMOVA 1956     Elista Town Court of the Kalmykia Republic, 06/03/2017   16/03/2017   pending More than 6 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 17 day(s)   EUR 15,079   Judgment debt: RUB 934,105.22 of unpaid amount under loan agreements against Republican State Unitary Enterprise “Optika”, liquidated on 30/10/2017. In the subsidiary liability proceedings brought by the applicant against various Republican Ministries, the courts found that the Ministry of Land and Property Relations of the Republic of Kalmykia "had paralysed [the debtor’s] professional activity", having withdrawn in 2013 its only non-residential premises from the debtor’s economic control without provision of new premises; and that in January 2017 the Republican Treasury had accepted the GUP’s assets on its balance. The courts rejected claims concerning the judgment debt under the judgment of 06/03/2017, as the debt "resulted from entrepreneurship activity of the GUP, exercised at its own risk" (having, by the same judgment, granted similar claims in respect of an unrelated judgment awarding the applicant with salary arears). Final judgment of 24/09/2020 by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.