CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 12 mai 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sCC018295 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .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 } 385 12.05.2010   Press release issued by the Registrar   Chamber judgments [1] concerning Austria, Greece and   Russia   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following six Chamber judgments. The judgment available only in French is indicated with an asterisk   (*).   Three repetitive cases [2] can be found at the end of the press release.     Kammerer v. Austria (application no. 32435/06) The applicant, Hermann Kammerer, is an Austrian national who was born in 1955 and lives in Axams (Austria). Relying on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial), he complained that a hearing before the Independent Administrative Panel – concerning proceedings brought against him for not having had the MOT test done on his car – had been held in his absence. No violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c)   Kalogranis and Kalograni v. Greece (no. 17229/08)* The applicants are a brother and sister, Dimitrios Kalogranis and Fani Kalograni. Greek nationals, they were born respectively in 1979 and 1980 and live in Athens. Relying in particular on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing), they complained about the authorities’ refusal to comply with a 1995 judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court concerning a plot of land that should have been returned to their grandfather, who died in 2001, and of whom they are the heirs. Violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) Just satisfaction: enforcement of judgment no. 5250/1995 within three months and, jointly, 12,000   euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR   3,000 (costs and expenses)   Kositsyn v. Russia (no. 69535/01) The applicant, Yevgeniy Kositsyn, is a Russian national who was born in 1962 and is currently serving a 14-year prison sentence in Kaliningrad (Russia) for murder. Relying on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), he complained about the conditions of his detention on remand during the criminal proceedings against him.   Violation of Article 3 (treatment) Just satisfaction: EUR 8,650 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR   350 (costs and expenses)     Repetitive cases   The following cases raise issues which have already been submitted to the Court.   Gulyayev v. Russia (no. 20023/07) This case concerned the applicant’s complaint that a final judgment in his favour had been quashed by way of supervisory review. Violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial)   Privalikhin v. Russia (no. 38029/05) Yeldashev v. Russia (no. 5730/03) These cases concerned the applicants’ complaints that the domestic authorities had failed to enforce final judgments in their favour in good time. They relied on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial) and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 (protection of property). Violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) (1 violation first case – 2 violations second case) Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (first case)   ***   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 ).   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) Frédéric Dolt (telephone : 00 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39) Nina Salomon (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79)   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.   [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. [2] In which the Court has reached the same findings as in similar cases raising the same issues under the Convention.