Communicated on 28 August 2017
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 65719/10
ZAKARPATSKA OBLASNA SPILKA SPOZHYVCHYKH TOVARYSTV
against Ukraine
lodged on 27 October 2010
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The case concerns the foreseeability of the restriction of the applicant’s right to access to the Supreme Court, the compatibility of this restriction with the legal certainty principle, and the length of a commercial dispute.
The applicant, a civic organisation, had a commercial dispute which was ruled against it by the Higher Commercial Court (“the HCC”) on 3 December 2009 acting as the court of cassation. Being entitled by the law to the repeated appeal on points of law, the applicant-organisation did so on 12 January 2010; however its appeal was returned by the HCC without examination on 31 May 2010 in the light of the decision of the Constitutional Court of 11 March 2010 according to which the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction within the meaning of the Constitution of Ukraine to review decisions of the HCC in commercial disputes. The applicant’s dispute lasted 7 years and 2 months before three instances.
The case raises issues similar to those in the cases of Ageyeva v. Ukraine (no. 42520/10) and Khlabystova v. Ukraine (no. 54581/10) (communicated).
QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES
1. Was the Higher Commercial Court’s refusal to forward the applicant’s appeal on points of law and the relevant case file to the Supreme Court compatible with the applicant’s rights under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention? In particular, were those actions foreseeable under the relevant domestic legislation and compatible with the legal certainty principle?
2. Was the length of the civil proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy