CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 21 février 2002

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 39 February 2002 Ryabykh v. Russia (dec.) - 52854/99 Decision 21.2.2002 [Section I] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Access to court Quashing of final and binding judgment: admissible Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 Deprivation of property Quashing of final judgment ordering return of savings placed in bank: admissible The applicant instituted civil proceedings against a local branch of the State Savings Bank, the State Savings Bank of Russia itself and the State on the ground that the sum she had deposited in the bank had not been properly reassessed in order to compensate the effects of inflation resulting from economic reforms although such a reassessment was prescribed by law. The District Court found in her favour and awarded her the sum of 129,544,106 roubles, to be paid out of the State Treasury. The judgment became final. Nonetheless, the president of the Regional Court later initiated supervisory review proceedings before the latter court against the final legally binding judgment, which the Regional Court quashed, rejecting the applicant’s claims without hearing her or even informing her that an application for supervisory review had been lodged. The enforcement proceedings were subsequently discontinued. Admissible under Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes