years of his detention found by the Supreme Court to be unlawful, the Ukrainian courts did not interpret and apply the domestic law in the spirit of Article 5 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Houtman

for compensation in respect of a deprivation of liberty effected in conditions contrary to paragraphs 1, 2, 3 or 4 (see Wassink v. the Netherlands , 27 September 1990, § 38, Series A no. 185-A, and Houtman

classification of that conduct, must apply the relevant surcharge rate provided for by law, without being able to vary it in consideration of the seriousness of the offence committed by the taxpayer.” ( CE , Houdmond