Communicated on 3 April 2019<\/p>\n
THIRD SECTION<\/p>\n
Application no. 47987\/15
\nVladimir Vladislavovich SOLYANIK
\nagainst Russia
\nlodged on 22 September 2015<\/p>\n
STATEMENT OF FACTS<\/strong><\/p>\n The applicant, Mr Vladimir Vladislavovich Solyanik, is a Russian national, who was born in 1967 and lives in Vladivostok. He is represented before the Court by Ms T.G. Akulibaba, a lawyer practising in Vladivostok.<\/p>\n The circumstances of the case<\/p>\n The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.<\/p>\n 1.\u00a0\u00a0Background to the case<\/em><\/p>\n The applicant owns a house and an adjacent plot of land located near the city cemetery in Vladivostok. The plot of land has a well on it, which is the only source of drinking water for the applicant.<\/p>\n On 1 November 1995 the mayor of Vladivostok ordered to close the cemetery and discontinue burials there because the cemetery\u2019s burial capacity had been reached and the further use of its territory would be contrary to sanitary regulations.<\/p>\n On 8 December 2009 the Regional Consumer Protection Authority (\u201cRospotrebnadzor\u201d \u2013 \u00ab\u0420\u043e\u0441\u043f\u043e\u0442\u0440\u0435\u0431\u043d\u0430\u0434\u0437\u043e\u0440\u00bb) ordered expert sanitary and epidemiological sampling of well water and soil on the applicant\u2019s land. The expert report demonstrated that the quality of water in the applicant\u2019s well fell short of standards for drinking water and that the soil was contaminated.<\/p>\n On 23 April 2010 the applicant and other individuals living in the same street requested Rospotrebnadzor to take measures because, despite the mayor\u2019s order, the burials had resumed at an unspecified time.<\/p>\n On 23 July 2010 the city administration issued ruling No. 830 which set aside the mayor\u2019s order closing the cemetery as invalid.<\/p>\n On 13 June 2012 the samples of underground water and soil from the applicant\u2019s land lot were examined by forensic experts on the order of the court. The experts established that the soil\u2019s bacteriological and parasitological markers dangerously exceeded the safety standards and that the activities of municipal burial service may contaminate the soil and endanger the lives and health of people residing on the lot of land.<\/p>\n 2.\u00a0\u00a0Domestic proceedings<\/em><\/p>\n On 25 June 2012 the Leninskiy District Court of Vladivostok dismissed the prosecutor\u2019s request to quash ruling No. 830 as unlawful.<\/p>\n On 22 April 2013 the Leninskiy District Court of Vladivostok dismissed the applicant\u2019s complaint against the municipal burial service and local administration (\u201cthe defendants\u201d), requesting to discontinue burials at the cemetery.<\/p>\n On 25 April 2013 the forensic expert bureau conducted the survey of the applicant\u2019s land at his request. According to the results of the survey, the outer border of the cemetery was located impermissibly close to the applicant\u2019s house and the land lot and placed them within the so-called \u201csanitary security zone\u201d, in violation of applicable health safety regulations. In particular, it was determined that the burials contaminate adjacent underground waters and soil which may cause mass infectious diseases. The experts further established that the cemetery\u2019s lay out was inclined at an angle in relation to the well on the applicant\u2019s plot of land, which created life and health hazard for the applicant and individuals sharing the house with him.<\/p>\n On 16 October 2013 the Primorsk Regional Court quashed the judgment of 22 April 2013 issued by the Leninskiy District Court of Vladivostok and ordered the defendants to discontinue burials carried out in violation of regulations on sanitary security zone. The municipal burial service and local administration appealed and the Primorsk Regional Court re-examined the case anew.<\/p>\n On 30 July 2014 the Primorsk Regional Court quashed the judgment of 22 April 2013 and ordered the defendants to submit, by 31 December 2014, a draft plan defining the dimensions of sanitary security zone of the cemetery.<\/p>\n On 25 March 2015 the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the judgment of the Primosrk Regional Court.<\/p>\n On 5 July 2017 the applicant informed the Court that the sanitary protection zone around the cemetery had not been established.<\/p>\n COMPLAINT<\/strong><\/p>\n The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention of a breach of his right to respect for his home and private life on account of on-going use of the cemetery in the proximity of his house.<\/p>\n QUESIONS TO THE PARTIES<\/strong><\/p>\n Has there been an interference with the applicant\u2019s right to respect for his private and family life and\/or home, within the meaning of Article 8 \u00a7\u00a01 of the Convention (see Dzemyuk v. Ukraine, no. 42488\/02, 4\u00a0September 2014)?<\/p>\n If so, was that interference in accordance with the law and necessary in terms of Article\u00a08 \u00a7\u00a02?<\/p>\n