CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 6 mai 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sEAF98D1B { width:7.13pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE0836E8C { width:7.81pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s4DFDBCC7 { width:188.96pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 32967/06 Aleksandr Veniaminovich SOKOLOV against Russia and 2 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 6 May 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Khanlar Hajiyev, President,   Julia Laffranque,   Erik Møse, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates listed in the appendix, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the Government and the applicants’ acceptance of their terms, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicants are Russian nationals whose names and dates of birth are specified in the appendix. 2.     The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. 3.     The applicants complained that their detention on remand had been unreasonably long and that it had not been based on relevant or sufficient reasons. 4.     On 30 August 2013 the applicants’ complaints were communicated to the Russian Government for observations. 5.     By letters of 1 November 2013 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the applications. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention. 6.     In that declaration, the Government acknowledged that all the applicants had been detained without “relevant and sufficient” grounds on the basis of decisions rendered by Russian courts which had not complied with the requirements of Article 5 §   3 of the Convention and stated their readiness to pay the following amounts to the applicants as just satisfaction: (a)   3,760 euros (EUR) to Mr SOKOLOV for his detention on remand “during 1 year, 10 months and 17 days from 2 July 2005”; (b)   EUR   2,480 to Mr   ISEKENOV for his detention on remand “during 1   year, 3 months and 22 days from 20 March 2009”; and (c)   EUR 4,000 to Mr TURKMENYAN for his detention on remand “during 1 year, 11 months and 17 days from 29 July 2009”. 7.     The remainder of their declaration provided as follows: “The sum referred to above, which is to cover any pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it 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. This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.” 8.     In their letters of different dates, the applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the Government’s declarations. THE LAW 9.     Having regard to the similarity of the main issues under the Convention in the above cases, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision. 10.     The Court considers that the applicants’ agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government shall be considered as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Cēsnieks v. Latvia (dec.), no.   9278/06, §   34, 6 March 2012, and Bakal and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no.   8243/08, 5   June 2012). 11.     The Court 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. 12.     In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention. 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. André Wampach   Khanlar Hajiyev Deputy Registrar   President Appendix   No Application No Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   32967/06 27/07/2006 Aleksandr Veniaminovich SOKOLOV 30/05/1967 Yekaterinburg   Larisa Viktorovna ZAKHAROVA   17652/11 18/02/2011 Nikita Vasilyevich ISEKENOV 02/01/1985 Sankt-Petersburg   Aleksey Vladimirovich DOBRODEYEV   64059/11 27/09/2011 Andronik Arutovich TURKMENYAN 19/01/1961 Akhshtyr   Ruslan Khamsudinovich KHUSHT