Communicated on 3 February 2017
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 64031/16
Yelena Vyacheslavovna VALDGARDT
against Russia
lodged on 17 October 2016
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Ms Yelena Vyacheslavovna Valdgardt, is a Russian national, who was born in 1970 and lives in Saint-Petersburg.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
In 1994 the applicant moved in with her partner N. who lived in a flat in St Petersburg of which he was the only owner.
In 1998 the applicant was registered as living in that flat and lived there with N. for the following fifteen years. They never married.
In 2013 N. died. He did not have any heirs.
On an unspecified date the administration of the Primorskiy District of St Petersburg (“the district administration”) brought court proceedings against the applicant seeking her eviction from the flat. The administration claimed that the flat had been a heirless estate and therefore the property rights to it had to be transferred to the administration. The administration, as the new owner of the flat, had the right to claim the applicant’s eviction.
The applicant contested those claims. She submitted the following arguments:
- she and N. had been living in the flat since 1994 as husband and wife
- she had shared a common household with N.;
- N. had let her in the flat as his family member;
- she had been paying the charges for the flat;
- she had no other housing.
On 23 November 2015 the District Court refused to evict the applicant from the flat. The District Court found, in particular, that N. had let the applicant in the flat as a family member and therefore after his death she had not lost the right to live in it.
The district administration appealed against that judgment.
On 25 April 2016 the St Petersburg City Court (“the City Court”) quashed that judgment and ordered to evict the applicant from the flat. The City Court held as follows:
“...
Mrs Valdgardt Ye.V.[the applicant] had been let in by the former owner [of the flat]. However, following the death of the owner and the transfer of the property rights to the flat to the City of St Petersburg pursuant to Article 292 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the right of Mrs Valdgardt to use the contested flat had come to an end.
Taking into account that there are no legal grounds which would allow Mrs to continue living in the flat and also because the defendant had not vacated the flat voluntarily, the claims of the administration of the Primorskiy District to evict the defendant from the living premises should be granted ...”
The applicant lodged a cassation appeal to the presidium of the City Court. She submitted, in particular, that the City Court had not taken into account that she had been in need of housing and had been put on a municipal housing list.
On 15 July 2016 a judge of the City Court refused to refer the applicant’s appeal to the cassation court.
The applicant lodged a cassation appeal to the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. She submitted, in particular, that the City Court had failed to examine the proportionality of her eviction in violation of Article 8 of the Convention.
On 22 August 2016 a judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused to refer the applicant’s cassation appeal to the cassation court.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention about a violation of her right to respect of her home.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for her home, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention?
2. If so, was that interference in accordance with the law? Did that interference pursue a legitimate aim and was it necessary in terms of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention (see, for instance McCann v. the United Kingdom, no. 19009/04, § 50, ECHR 2008; Ćosić v. Croatia, no. 28261/06, §§ 20-23, 15 January 2009; and Paulić v. Croatia, no. 3572/06, §§ 40-45, 22 October 2009)?
The Government are required to provide copies of the following documents:
- the statement of claim lodged by the administration of the Primorskiy District in the eviction proceedings;
- the applicant’s reply to that statement of claim;
- the grounds of appeal of the administration of the Primorskiy District against the judgment of 23 November 2015 of the Primorskiy District Court of St Petersburg;
- the applicant’s reply to those grounds of appeal.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy