THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 33589/05
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich SHANSKOV against Russia
and 4 other applications
(see list appended)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 June 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 observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicant and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the existence of effective domestic remedies to complain about the length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). The applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
A. Joinder of the applications
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
B. Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings)
In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for delays which occurred in the process of the examination of the applicants’ civil cases.
In particular, the Court notes that having regard to the overall length of the proceedings, the relevant complexity of the cases, the applicants’ conduct and that of the authorities, including the diligence they displayed while dealing with the cases, and the levels of jurisdiction involved, the length of the proceedings was not excessive and met the “reasonable time” requirement (see, among other authorities, Vasilchenko v. Russia, no. 34784/02, §§ 41-43, 23 September 2010; Danilina v. Russia (dec.), no. 5727/04, 11 March 2010; Kuznetsova v. Russia (dec.), no. 9839/03, 24 May 2007; Antonov v. Russia (dec.), no. 38020/03, 3 November 2011; Markin v. Russia (dec.), no. 59502/00, 16 September 2004; and Kuznetsov v. Russia (dec.), no. 73994/01, 17 June 2004).
In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
C. Complaints under Article 13 of the Convention (lack of an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings)
The applicants also complained that they did not have at their disposal an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings in their civil cases. The Court reiterates in this respect that this provision only applies to those with an arguable claim under the Convention (see Silver and Others v. the United Kingdom, 25 March 1983, § 113, Series A no. 61). Given that the applicants’ complaint under Article 6 was rejected for being manifestly ill-founded, the complaint under Article 13 should also be declared manifestly ill-founded and rejected under Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
D. Remaining complaints
The applicants also raised other complaints under various provisions of the Convention.
The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 21 July 2016.
Hasan BakırcıHelena Jäderblom
Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant name
Date of birth/Date of registration
Representative name and location
Start of proceedings
End of proceedings
Total length Level of jurisdiction
Other complaints under
well-established case-law
33589/05
15/08/2005
Aleksandr Aleksandrovich SHANSKOV
24/10/1971
Vereshchagina Natalya Mikhaylovna
Moscow
19/04/2001
24/02/2005
3 year(s) and
10 month(s) and 6 day(s)
2 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings
22753/06
12/05/2006
(4 applicants)
Lyudmila Fedorovna BAL
22/05/1951
Sergey Olegovich BAL
19/05/1950
Natalya Sergeyevna BAL
22/08/1972
Andrey Sergeyevich BAL
01/02/1976
Sivoldayev Ilya Vladimirovich
Voronezh
10/12/2001
24/11/2005
3 year(s) and
11 month(s) and 15 day(s)
2 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings
26337/06
29/04/2006
Nikolay Vladimirovich SOROKIN
04/06/1939
04/10/2004
14/03/2006
1 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 11 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings
2737/07
23/11/2006
Natalya Vladimirovna ANDRUSENKO
03/05/1984
GORBUNOVA
Lyubov Petrovna
Omsk
27/04/2004
23/05/2006
28/12/2005
06/09/2006
1 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 2 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction
3 month(s) and 15 day(s)
2 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings
12238/07
14/02/2007
Aleksandr Mikhaylovich LEBEDEV
23/09/1961
01/12/2004
02/10/2008
3 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 2 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy