CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 19 avril 2005

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sE0D34C67 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   206 19.4.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   Chamber judgments concerning Ukraine   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following five Chamber judgments, none of which is final [1] .   Dolgov v. Ukraine (application no. 72704/01)                                        Violation of Article 6 § 1 Piryanik v. Ukraine (no. 75788/01 )                                                             Violation of Article 6 § 1 Sharko v. Ukraine (no. 72686/01)                                                          Violation of Article 6 § 1 Nazarchuk v. Ukraine (no. 9670/02)                                           Violation of Article 6 § 1 and 13 Shcherbakov v. Ukraine (no. 75786/01)       Violation Article 6 § 1 & Article 1 of Protocol No. 1   In these five cases the applicants are all Ukrainian nationals. Aleksandr Olegovich Dolgov was born in 1958 and lives in Illovaisk, Ivan Zakharovych Nazarchuk was born in 1941 and lives in Dolyns’ka, Sergey Alekseyevich Piryanik was born in 1970 and lives in Privolye, Georgiy Alekseyevich Sharko was born in 1939 and lives in Donetsk and Anatoliy Aleksandrovich Shcherbakov was born in 1956 and lives in Lysychansk (all Ukraine).   Mr Dolgov, Mr Piryanik and Mr Shcherbakov brought proceedings to obtain arrears of pay. Mr Nazarchuk applied to the Ukrainian courts seeking compensation for the illegal seizure and confiscation of his car. Mr   Sharko brought proceedings following the cessation of payment of the invalidity pension to which he is entitled.   The applicants complained of the State authorities’ failure to enforce the judgments in their favour. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time), they complained of the lengthy period which had elapsed before the sums awarded were paid. Mr Dolgov further alleged a violation of Article 4 (prohibition of forced labour), Mr   Sharko and Mr Shcherbakov a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Mr Nazarchuk a violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy). Lastly, Mr   Sharko also alleged a violation of Article 2 (right to life).   The European Court of Human Rights declared the applications of Mr Nazarchuk, Mr   Piryanik and Mr Shcherbakov admissible in their entirety and those of Mr Dolgov and Mr   Sharko admissible only as regards the complaint under Article 6 § 1.   The Court noted that the decisions concerned were enforced in full when the applications lodged with it by the applicants were communicated to the Ukrainian Government. By failing to comply with the judgments in the applicants’ favour the national authorities had prevented them from receiving the full amounts to which they were entitled, for one year and eight months in the shortest case and for more than four years in the longest. The Court accordingly held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 in each of these cases.   The Court further held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the case of Shcherbakov v. Ukraine and a violation of Article 13 in the case of Nazarchuk v. Ukraine .   The Court considered that the finding of a violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction for the damage alleged by Mr Nazarchuk. Under Article 41 (just satisfaction), it decided to award the overall sums of 2,500 euros (EUR) to Mr Dolgov, EUR 1,400 to Mr   Piryanik, EUR 2,000 to Mr Sharko and EUR 1,500 to Mr Shcherbakov. (The judgments are available only in English.)     ***   These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts of the Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.