Russia, nos. 54381/08 and 5   others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018; and Korneyeva v.

The relevant domestic law and practice concerning restitution of agricultural land and compensation in lieu thereof have been summarised in the Court’s judgment in the case of Sivova and Koleva v.

du greffe Date de réception par le destinataire   25795/06 29/05/2006 Yevgeniy Vasilyevich KRASIKOV 30/01/1944 Moscou   26/10/2017 11/11/2017   43092/09 25/05/2009 Yuriy Alekseyevich KOROLEV

D, - et les observations de Me Koreleva, avocate commise d'office, représentant M.

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

The authorities’ failure to comply with those requirements, in the Court’s view, led to a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see, in particular, Korneyeva v. Russia , no.

The relevant domestic law and practice concerning restitution of agricultural land and compensation in lieu thereof have been summarised in the Court’s judgment in the case of Sivova and Koleva v.

The relevant domestic law and practice concerning restitution of agricultural land and compensation in lieu thereof have been summarised in the Court’s judgment in the case of Sivova and Koleva v.

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

    The applicants, Mr Krsta Gigić and Ms Milka Gigić, are Serbian nationals, who were born in 1947 and 1949, respectively, and live in Koceljeva.

Yuryevna Savinkova, RUR 3,751.99 to Mrs Svetlana Gennadyevna Rogoleva, RUR 3,751.99 to Mrs Olga Grigoryevna Godina, RUR 3,751.99 to Mrs Olga Nikolayevna Solovyeva, RUR 3,751.99 to Mrs Natalya Mikhaylovna Koroleva

Russia , no. 4493/04, §§ 32-36, 25 October 2007 and Koroleva v. Russia , no. 1600/09, §§ 41-61, 13 November 2012. COMPLAINTS 1.

Violation de l’article 3 (traitement) Violation de l’article 5 §§ 1 c) et 3 Satisfaction équitable   : 10   000 EUR (dommage moral) et 3   900 EUR (frais et dépens)   Korolev c.

The applicant’s subjective feeling about the impact of the alleged violations has to be justifiable on objective grounds (see Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no.   25551/05, 1 July 2010).

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

Russia , nos. 54381/08 and 5 others, §§ 115-31, 10 April 2018, and Korneyeva v.

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

  36659/04, 1   June   2010; Korolev v. Russia (dec.), no.   25551/05, 1   July   2010, ECHR   2010-...; and Holub v. the Czech Republic (dec.), no.

    La Cour rappelle tout d’abord les principes développés dans sa jurisprudence concernant ce critère de recevabilité ( Korolev c.