THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 67774/09
Aleksey Sergeyevich KOZYREV against Russia
and 3 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 17 November 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helena Jäderblom, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Branko Lubarda, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.
The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications.
The Government acknowledged the excessive length of pre‑trial detention. In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above‑mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
The applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
The Court finds that, following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.
It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the applications.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 8 December 2016.
Hasan BakırcıHelena Jäderblom
Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
No.
Application No.
Date of introduction
Applicant name
Date of birth
Representative name and location
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s acceptance
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses
per applicant
(in euros)[i]
67774/09
24/11/2009
Aleksey Sergeyevich KOZYREV
19/04/1977
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - Delayed review of appeals against detention orders of 22/07/2009 and 17/11/2009
01/06/2016
18/08/2016
7,500
64154/10
11/10/2010
Roman Grigoryevich ANTIPIN
20/02/1977
Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention –
1) Complaint that the applicant’s appeal against the detention order of 12/11/2010 was considered only on 28/02/2011
2) Complaint that the applicant’s appeal against the detention order of 11/02/2011 was considered only on 16/05/2011
3) Complaint that the applicant’s appeal against the detention order of 08/11/2011 was considered only on 17/02/2012
11/02/2016
04/08/2016
4,550
1833/14
25/12/2013
Konstantin Nikolayevich ZOTOV
16/06/1977
Zurabyan Artur
Moscow
01/06/2016
23/08/2016
1,100
50518/15
28/09/2015
Aleksey Markovich SOROKIN
07/04/1951
01/06/2016
25/07/2016
5,050
[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy