CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 27 novembre 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s31E56244 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sCDF1E38D { width:180.93pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .sD0B5C7A1 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .sAE61E8C9 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s11517CCE { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .s959CEE7E { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s5B8637C { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s359B1B04 { margin-left:22.95pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:25.65pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:9pt } .sB673203C { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sED1A34C5 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s29BE6C23 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .s78B6B604 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sCEE978D { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 18662/06 Lyudmila Alekseyevna BUKOVA against Ukraine and 8 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 27   November 2012 as a committee composed of:   Angelika Nußberger, President,   André Potocki,   Aleš Pejchal, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the applications lodged on the dates specified in the annexed table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases and the applicants’ reply to those declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants are Ukrainian nationals whose names and dates of birth are specified in the annexed table. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   N. Kultchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice. On the dates set out in the annexed table domestic courts delivered judgments according to which the applicants were entitled to various pecuniary amounts or to take certain actions in their favour. The judgments became enforceable. However, the applicants were unable to obtain the enforcement of the judgments in due time because of the authorities’ failure to take specific budgetary or regulatory measures, or because of the bailiffs’ omissions. Relying on various provisions of the Convention, the applicants complained about the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgments given in their favour. Some of the applicants also raised other complaints under the Convention. THE LAW 1.     The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background. 2.     The Government submitted several unilateral declarations with a view to settling the applicants’ cases. By the declarations, the Government acknowledged the excessive duration of the enforcement of the applicants’ judgments and declared that they were ready to pay to the applicants the outstanding judgement debts and the compensation sums specified in the annexed table. The Government invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The declarations also provided that the compensation sums were to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, would be free of any taxes that might be applicable and would be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. They would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article   37   § 1 (c) of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The applicants expressed their agreement with the terms of the Government’s declarations, though some of them questioned the Government’s compliance. The Court finds that following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties. It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. In light of the above the Court considers that the parties have actually reached a friendly settlement concerning the applications. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. Therefore, they should be struck out of the list in accordance with Article   39   of the Convention which is relevant in the present cases. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention. Stephen Phillips   Angelika Nußberger Deputy Registrar   President       APPENDIX   No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant’s name, date of birth (if known) Domestic judgments about the lengthy non-enforcement of which the applicants complain (date of the judgment and name of the court) Date of the Government’s unilateral declaration Compensation offered by the Government (in euros)   18662/06 26/04/2006 Lyudmila Alekseyevna BUKOVA 19/01/1947   27 October 1997,   Kramatorsk Court 10 May 2012 2,415   489/08 10/12/2007 Mariya Stepanovna ZUBANOVA 01/01/1942 13 October 2003 and 28 January 2004, Torez Court 10 May 2012 1,530   8553/08 25/01/2008 Raisa Ivanovna YERYGINA 02/04/1941 8 April 2004, Krasnyy Luch Court 30 May 2012 1,440   5681/09 20/01/2009 Liliya Vladimirovna YANCHUKOVA 20/09/1975 19 April 2006, Torez Court 10 May 2012 1,080   17932/09 18/03/2009 Nadiya Andriyivna KOLESNYK 1952   29 November 2007, Tetiyv Court 1 June 2012 810   2506/10 11/12/2009 Marfa Kupriyanivna SHEVCHUK 12/08/1931 8 April 2009, Bershady Court 5 April 2012 525   14110/10 25/02/2010 Vasyl Vasylyovych BEGAL 11/01/1966 22 November 2006, Gorodok Court 5 April 2012 945   30627/10 21/05/2010 Grygoriy Ivanovych PYSAREVYCH 28/10/1946 11 November 2004,   Chervonograd Court 1 June 2012 1,350   37683/10 21/06/2010 Antonina Ivanovna KOLOSOVA 04/12/1962 29 May 2007, Yevapatoriya Court 11 May 2012 780