assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva

In the case of Karyagin, Matveyev and Korolev v.

Cette appréciation doit tenir compte tant de la perception subjective du requérant que de l’enjeu objectif du litige (voir, parmi d’autres, Korolev c. Russie (déc.) n o 25551/05, 1 er juillet 2010).

page-break-after:avoid } .sBFD8E45 { width:185.97pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 73204/01 by Viktor KORNEYEV and Galina KORNEYEVA

    02/02/2022 12/02/2020,       03/02/2022 Detention as an administrative suspect: the applicant remained in detention after the offence record had been compiled (see Korneyeva

(b)    Tort proceedings Thereafter the applicants brought civil proceedings against the Prosecutor’s Office of the town of Korolev of the Moscow Region, the Korolev Town Department of the Interior

Russia 14/04/2012 Korolev Prosecutor’s office Consistently refused 19/02/2014 Numerous refusals to prosecute. The latest refusal to prosecute of 19/02/2014 was quashed on 27/05/2014.

  36659/04, 1 June 2010; Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no. 25551/05, 1   July 2010; Gaftoniuc v. Romania (dec.), no. 30934/05, 22 February 2011).

Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 121-22, 10   April 2018, and Korneyeva v.

assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva

    In the leading case of Korneyeva v.

against Russia and Larisa Viktorovna KOVALEVA against Russia lodged on 2 September 2010 and 28 February 2014 respectively STATEMENT OF FACTS 1.

xa0;      45180/08 05/05/2008 Grigoriy Ivanovich SEMENENKO 02/01/1937 Samara             45182/08 05/05/2008 Klavdiya Vasilyevna KOVALEVA

It noted further that third parties claiming rights to the same land could defend these rights in a subsequent procedure, such as rei vindicatio judicial proceedings (see Sivova and Koleva , cited above

    Relying on the Court’s findings in the case of Sivova and Koleva , (cited above), which concerned similar circumstances, the Government considered that Article 6 § 1 had not been violated

  Bessonov et Kobelev, les tribunaux ordonnèrent l’octroi aux intéressés de logements situés à Moscou.

République tchèque (déc.), n o 24880/05 , 14 décembre 2010   ; Korolev c. Russie (déc.), n o   25551/05 , CEDH 2010, et Adrian Mihai Ionescu c.

seuil doit être apprécié au cas par cas, en fonction de l’ensemble des circonstances de l’espèce (voir, parmi d’autres, Holub c. la République tchèque (déc.), n o 24880/05, 14 décembre 2010   ; Korolev

assessment that it was impracticable, on the spot, to compile the offence record (Art. 27.2 § 1 CAO) and achieve the objectives set out in Art. 27.1 CAO, e.g. to establish the suspect’s identity (see Korneyeva