55523/21 31/10/2021 Dmitriy Viktorovich KOROLEV 1978   Memorial Human Rights Centre Moscow Rally "Free Navalnyy"   Tambov   21/04/2021 article 20.2 § 6.1 of CAO detention

Aleksey Valeryevich Orel 10/02/2016 marijuana fellow drug user Moscow Regional Court, 16/02/2017     53781/17 18/07/2017 Sergey Aleksandrovich Antonov 09/12/1985 Sivchenko Vadim Tikhonovich Korolev

    The Court reiterates the principles developed in its case-law concerning the criterion of significant disadvantage ( Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no.   25551/05, ECHR 2010; Giusti v.

the award (roughly equal to 140 euros (EUR)), the Court finds that the applicant did not suffer a significant disadvantage as a result of the authorities’ failure to enforce the impugned award (see Korolev

  Russia (dec.), no. 29612/09, 5 November 2009; Kovaleva and Others v.   Russia (dec.), no. 6025/09, 25 June 2009; Denisov v. Russia , (dec.), no.

Komleva, to whom the applicant issued the letter of authority.

  Roumanie [GC], n o 28342/95, § 61, CEDH 1999-VII, et Sinova et Koleva c. Bulgarie , n o 30383/03, § 66, 15 novembre 2011). 18.

Bulgaria (no. 17353/03, §§ 21-42, 26   November 2009) and Sivova and Koleva v. Bulgaria (no. 30383/03, §§   30-35, 15 November 2011).

of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of excessive delay and lengthy uncertainty in proceedings concerning restitution of agricultural land in a number of cases against Bulgaria (see Sivova and Koleva

complaints relating to the duration of the restitution process in Bulgaria and the accompanying lack of certainty as to the scope of the applicants’ restitution rights (see, for example, Sivova and Koleva

  54381/08 and 5   others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v.   Russia , no.

Koroleva, a lawyer practising in Kramatorsk. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr I. Lishchyna.

  31848/23* 20/07/2023 Yekaterina Andreyevna KOROLEVA 1999     Anti-war protest   Moscow 06/03/2022 Article 20.2 § 5 of CAO fine of RUB 15,000 Moscow City Court 21/03/2023 Art. 5 (1

KOLKUTIN 12/07/2016 12/07/2016 2450/04 KONDRATYEV 09/04/2009 09/07/2009 41169/02 KONONOVICH 09/07/2009 09/10/2009 75039/01 KORCHUGANOVA 08/06/2006 08/09/2006 48416/09 KORKIN 12/11/2015 02/05/2016 1600/09 KOROLEVA

The severity of a violation should be assessed taking account of both the applicant’s subjective perceptions and what is objectively at stake in a particular case (see Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no.

defined in the Convention and the Protocols attached thereto requires an examination of the application on the merits; and (3)   whether the case was duly considered by a domestic tribunal (see also Korolev

Roumanie (déc.), n o   36659/04, 1 er   juin   2010, et Korolev c. Russie (déc.), n o 25551/05, CEDH   2010).

  54381/08 and   5   others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v.   Russia , no.

  54381/08 and 5   others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v.   Russia , no.