CASE OF SALKOV AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE – 13087/17 and 10 others

Last Updated on January 18, 2024 by LawEuro

European Court of Human Rights
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF SALKOV AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
(Applications nos. 13087/17 and 10 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
18 January 2024

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Salkov and Others v. Ukraine,

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Mārtiņš Mits, President,
Kateřina Šimáčková,
Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 14 December 2023,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

THE LAW

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

4. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 AND ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION

5. The applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in their cases had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention.

6. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).

7. In the leading case of Karnaushenko v. Ukraine (no. 23853/02, 30 November 2006), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

8. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement.

9. The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints.

10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 and of Article 13 of the Convention.

III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Karnaushenko, cited above, §§ 70 and 75), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to join the applications;

2. Declares the applications admissible;

3. Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law;

4. Holds

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 18 January 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina                   Mārtiņš Mits
Acting Deputy Registrar                 President

____________

APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law)

No. Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location Start of proceedings End of proceedings Total length

Levels of jurisdiction

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant/ household

(in euros)[i]

1. 13087/17

08/02/2017

Volodymyr Viktorovych SALKOV

1956

 

 

19/12/2014 23/06/2021 6 years and

6 months and 5 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

900
2. 18378/17

22/02/2017

Oleg Valeriyovych IVANISHCHEV

1972

Avramenko Gennadiy Mykolayovych

Chernigiv

21/11/2014 29/09/2021 6 years and

10 months and 9 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

900
3. 20605/17

06/03/2017

Valentyn Vasylyovych TVERDOKHLIB

1963

 

 

26/11/2014 29/06/2021 6 years and

7 months and 4 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

900
4. 1532/18

29/12/2017

Igor Anatoliyovych PRYSHKO

1979

Avramenko Gennadiy Mykolayovych

Chernigiv

11/11/2014

 

pending

 

More than

9 years and 4 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

1,800
5. 19904/18

17/04/2018

Oleksandr Anatoliyovych GARDETSKYY

1978

Avramenko Gennadiy Mykolayovych

Chernigiv

07/04/2015

 

30/09/2021

 

6 years and

5 months and 24 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

600
6. 57092/18

23/11/2018

Igor Volodymyrovych ROGATYUK

1976

Avramenko Gennadiy Mykolayovych

Chernigiv

03/11/2014

 

15/12/2021

 

7 years and

1 month and 13 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

900
7. 38183/18

27/07/2018

Oleksandr Pavlovych PROSKURIN

1958

 

 

19/01/2015

 

pending

 

More than 8 years

and 10 months and 5 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

2,300
8. 2370/19

11/12/2018

Household

Olga Petrivna KOTOVSKA

1982

Mariya Dmytrivna KOTOVSKA

1959

Mukan Ivan Vasylyovych

Staryy Sambir

15/12/2006 pending More than 16 years

and 11 months and 2 days

1 level of jurisdiction

8,400
9. 12788/19

27/02/2019

Anatoliy Grygorovych LOZA

1946

 

 

08/06/2010

16/11/2011

26/07/2016

24/05/2011

19/05/2016

27/06/2018 (decision of 27/06/2018 received by the applicant on 27/08/2018)

7 years and 4 months

and 23 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

900
10. 38492/21

22/07/2021

Oleg Yuriyovych ANDRUSHCHENKO

1988

Sobyna Pavlo Mykolayovych

Okhtyrka

28/03/2019 pending More than 4 years and

7 months and 18 days

1 level of jurisdiction

1,500
11. 3741/23

30/12/2022

Galyna Mykhaylivna SHEPELEVA

1972

Trushkivska Lesya Viktorivna

Kyiv

25/03/2014 31/08/2022 8 years and 5 months

and 7 days

3 levels of jurisdiction

1,200

[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *