CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 septembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; 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 22 September 2025   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 18600/18 Mykola Oleksandrovych MARTOVOD against Ukraine lodged on 5 April 2018 communicated on 2 September 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the fairness of proceedings for damages brought against the applicant by a certain Shch., whose car was damaged in a traffic accident caused by the applicant. Having sold the car few weeks after the accident, Shch. claimed damages from the applicant based on an expert report, drafted under Instruction no.   142/5/2092, which established that the car could not be repaired and that, therefore, the damages amounted to its value at the time of the accident. In proceedings ending with a final decision of the Higher Specialised Court of Civil and Criminal Matters of 25 September 2017, national courts allowed Shch.’s claim. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complains that the national courts did not address in their decisions his requests to transfer the car wrecks to him in the event that Shch.’s claim was allowed, to conduct a further expert examination to establish the amount of damages and to call witnesses, including the new owner of the car.         QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, did the domestic courts provide sufficient reasons for their decisions and were their decisions “arbitrary” and/or “manifestly unreasonable” (see Bochan v. Ukraine (no. 2)   [GC], no.   22251/08, §§   61 ‑ 64, ECHR 2015;   Ramos Nunes de Carvalho e Sá v. Portugal   [GC], nos.55391/13   and 2 others, §   185, 6   November 2018, with further references)?