Общественное объединение "Сутяжник"

Главная страница

Новости судебных дел

Судебное дело "Козлов против России"


Решение Европейского Суда по правам человека от 8 января 2009 г. (англ)

 

09.02.2009

 

                   COUR EUROPEENNE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME

                       EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

                               FIRST SECTION

                                  DECISION

                          Application no. 25249/03

                              by Sergey KOZLOV

                               against Russia

   The  European  Court  of  Human  Rights  (First Section), sitting on 8
   January 2009 as a Chamber composed of:

   Christos Rozakis, President,

   Anatoly Kovler,

   Elisabeth Steiner,

   Khanlar Hajiyev,

   Dean Spielmann,

   Giorgio Malinverni,

   George Nicolaou,yWgas, and Seren Nielsen, Section Registrar,

   Having  regard to the above application lodged on 29 June 2003, Having
   deliberated, decides as follows:

   THE FACTS

   The applicant, Mr Sergey Viktorovich Kozlov, is a Russian national who
   was  born  in  1973  and  lives in the town of Berezovskiy, Sverdlovsk
   Region.  He  was  represented  before  the  Court by Ms L. Churkina, a
   lawyer  practising  in  Yekaterinburg.  The  Russian  Government ("the
   Government")   were   represented   by   Ms   V.   Milinchuk,   former
   Representative  of  the  Russian  Federation  at the European Court of
   Human Rights.

   The  facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised
   as follows.

   The  applicant  was  arrested on suspicion of theft but later released
   under an undertaking to appear before the court. He was detained again
   in 2003. By judgment of 16 December 2003, the Kirovskiy District Court
   of Yekaterinburg convicted the applicant of theft and sentenced him to
   two years' imprisonment. It appears that the applicant was released on
   3 June 2005 but detained again in September 2005 on new charges.

   It  appears  that  the  applicant  was detained in Yekaterinburg no. 1
   remand  centre  between  2002  and  2006. The applicant unsuccessfully
   complained  to  various public authorities about the conditions of his
   detention. According to him, the cells were constantly overcrowded.

   COMPLAINTS

   The  applicant  complained  under  Article  3  of the Convention about
   conditions of his detention.

   The  applicant  complained  under Article 5 of the Convention that his
   arrest and detention were unlawful.

   The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that he had
   not  been  afforded an opportunity to prepare for a remand hearing and
   in  general terms about deficiencies in the preliminary investigation.
   He also relied on Articles 8,13 and 17 of the Convention.

   THE LAW

   In  February 2008 the parties informed the Court that they had reached
   a  friendly settlement and enclosed a copy of the settlement agreement
   signed  by  the applicant and Ms V. Milinchuk, the then Representative
   of  the  Russian  Federation  at  the  Court.  Under  the terms of the
   agreement the Russian authorities undertook to pay the applicant 5,000
   euros  (EUR),  including value added tax, in full and final resolution
   of  the case. The above sum will be paid to the applicant within three
   months of the date of notification of the Court's decision.

   It was further stipulated that, subject to the fulfilment of the above
   undertaking,   the   applicant  had  no  further  claims  against  the
   authorities  of the Russian Federation in respect of the facts set out
   in his application before the Court.

   The  Court  refers to Article 37 of the Convention which, in so far as
   relevant, provides as follows:

   "The  Court  may  at  any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an
   application  out  of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to
   the conclusion that...

   (b) the matter has been resolved;...

   However,  the  Court shall continue the examination of the application
   if  respect  for  human  rights  as  defined in the Convention and the
   Protocols thereto so requires."

   The  Court  takes  note of the settlement reached between the parties.
   The  Court  has  no  reason to doubt that the amount specified in this
   settlement  will  be  paid  to  the  applicant  as  agreed.  In  these
   circumstances, the Court considers that the matter was resolved at the
   domestic  level,  within  the  meaning  of  Article 37 S: 1 (b) of the
   Convention. Furthermore, the Court is satisfied that respect for human
   rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require
   it  at present to continue the examination of the application (Article
   37  S:  1  in  fine).  Accordingly,  Article 29 S: 3 of the Convention
   should  no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the
   list.

   For these reasons, the Court unanimously

   Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.


Если вы хотите поддержать нашу деятельность, то введите в поле ниже сумму в рублях, которую вы готовы пожертвовать и кликните кнопку рядом:

рублей.      


Поделиться в социальных сетях:

  Diaspora*

Комментарии:

Добавить комментарий:

Ваше имя или ник:

(Войти? Зарегистрироваться? Забыли пароль? Войти под OpenID?)

Ваш e-mail (не обязателен, если укажете - будет опубликован на сайте):

Ваш комментарий:

Введите цифры и буквы с картинки (защита от спам-роботов):