Source: https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=EGMR&Datum=15.10.2009&Aktenzeichen=40450/04
Timestamp: 2019-05-24 02:05:02
Document Index: 281531580

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 6', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 41', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 46', 'Art. 1', 'Art. 1', 'Art. 6', 'Art. 13', '§ 34', '§ 27', '§ 36', 'Art. 6', '§ 34', '§ 38', '§ 51', '§ 27', '§ 65', '§ 50', '§ 55', '§ 38', '§ 51', '§ 114', '§ 182', '§ 43', '§ 98', '§ 65', '§ 1', '§ 91', '§ 98', '§ 65', '§ 38', '§ 51']

EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 40450/04 - dejure.org
https://dejure.org/2009,68189
EGMR, 15.10.2009 - 40450/04 (https://dejure.org/2009,68189)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 15.10.2009 - 40450/04 (https://dejure.org/2009,68189)
EGMR, Entscheidung vom 15. Januar 2009 - 40450/04 (https://dejure.org/2009,68189)
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2009,68189) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Art. 6, Art. 6 Abs. 1, Art. 13, Art. 41, Art. 46, Art. 46 Abs. 2, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
Remainder inadmissible Violation of Art. 6-1 Violation of P1-1 Violation of Art. 13 Respondent State to take individual measures Respondent State to take measures of a general character Non-pecuniary damage - award (englisch)
EGMR, 14.09.2011 - 40450/04
EGMR, 06.12.2012 - 40450/04
EGMR, 07.06.2017 - 40450/04
Vgl. z. B. EGMR, Urteile vom 7. Mai 2002, Burdov/Russland (CE:ECHR:2002:0507JUD005949800, §§ 34 bis 37), vom 6. März 2003, Jasi?«niene/Litauen (CE:ECHR:2003:0306JUD004151098, §§ 27 bis 31), vom 7. April 2005, Uzkureliene/Litauen (CE:ECHR:2005:0407JUD006298800, § 36), wo allerdings festgestellt wurde, dass die geltend gemachten Verzögerungen bei der Vollstreckung einer gerichtlichen Entscheidung keinen Verstoß gegen Art. 6 Abs. 1 darstellen, vom 7. Juli 2005, Malinovskiy/Russland (CE:ECHR:2005:0707JUD004130202, §§ 34 bis 39), vom 31. Oktober 2006, Jelicic/Bosnien-Herzegovina (CE:ECHR:2006:1031JUD004118302, §§ 38 bis 45), vom 15. Oktober 2009, Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov/Ukraine (CE:ECHR:2009:1015JUD004045004, §§ 51 bis 57), und vom 19. Juni 2012, Murtic und Cerimovic/Bosnien-Herzegovina (CE:ECHR:2012:0619JUD000649509, §§ 27 bis 30).
An unreasonably long delay in the enforcement of a binding judgment may therefore breach the Convention (see Burdov v. Russia, no. 59498/00, ECHR 2002-III; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 65, ECHR 2009; and Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, §§ 50-53, 15 October 2009).
EGMR, 01.03.2016 - 2971/08
ARBACIAUSKIENÄ- v. LITHUANIA
It notes that it was within the power of the authorities to organise the proceedings related to the land reform in such a manner which would not impair the essence of the applicant's right to be allocated a plot of land, recognised by a final and binding court judgment (see, mutatis mutandis, Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, § 55, 15 October 2009).
EGMR, 21.07.2015 - 31833/06
CINGILLI HOLDING A.S. AND CINGILLIOGLU v. TURKEY
It refers to its extensive case-law concerning the non-enforcement or the delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments (see, amongst many other cases, Tacea v. Romania, no. 746/02, 29 September 2005; Jelicic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 41183/02, §§ 38-39, ECHR 2006-XII; Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, §§ 51-57, 15 October 2009; and Süzer and Eksen Holding A.S., cited above, § 114).
While the compliance of the improved compensatory mechanism with the Convention requirements will be examined by the Court below (see paragraphs 103-115), the Court is bound to observe that the situation in the present group of Russian post-pilot cases is visibly different - both from the standpoint of the progress achieved at domestic level (see paragraphs 84 and 94 above) and the caseload - from the recent case of Burmych and Others v. Ukraine ([GC], nos. 46852/13 and 4 others, §§ 182-84, 12 October 2017), in which the Grand Chamber concluded that the pilot judgment in Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine (no. 40450/04, 15 October 2009) dealing with repetitive non-enforcement cases lodged against Ukraine had "clearly not succeeded in achieving its aims" (contrast Burmych and Others, cited above, §§ 43, 146-47 and 182-84).
As regards remedies in the context of enforcement of domestic judicial decisions, the Court has held that any domestic means to prevent a violation by ensuring timely enforcement is, in principle, of greatest value (see Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 98, ECHR 2009, and Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, § 65, ECHR 2009-...(extracts)).
In view of the violation it found of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that the applicant had an arguable claim for the purposes of Article 13. It then recalls that domestic remedies in cases of failure to implement domestic judgments can in principle be either of preventive or of compensatory nature (see Stoyanov and Tabakov v. Bulgaria, no. 34130/04, § 91, 26 November 2013; Burdov v. Russia (no. 2), no. 33509/04, § 98, ECHR 2009; Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no 40450/04, § 65, CEDH 2009-... (extraits)).).
EGMR, 19.06.2012 - 6495/09
MURTIC AND CERIMOVIC v. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA
The Court also recalls its extensive case-law concerning the non-enforcement or the delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments (see, amongst many other cases, Jelicic v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, no. 41183/02, §§ 38-39, ECHR 2006-XII; Tacea v. Romania, no. 746/02, 29 September 2005; and Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine, no. 40450/04, §§ 51-57, 15 October 2009).
EGMR, 12.10.2017 - 45879/07
SEMYRODA AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that it also discloses a violation of the Convention in the light of its findings in Yuriy Nikolayevich Ivanov v. Ukraine (no. 40450/04, 15 October 2009).
EGMR, 06.07.2017 - 26417/08
DYACHENKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 05.03.2013 - 36274/08
STOJILKOVIC AND OTHERS v. SERBIA
EGMR, 07.02.2012 - 42842/05
ZAVGORODNIY v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
EGMR, 18.01.2018 - 44452/10
GAVRILOV v. BULGARIA
EGMR, 18.01.2018 - 68185/11
SHEHOVA v. BULGARIA
EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 62904/12
FIDANYAN v. ARMENIA
EGMR, 11.01.2018 - 7205/11
PAPOYAN v. ARMENIA
EGMR, 20.07.2017 - 29432/08
BALANDINA AND ANDREYKO v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 18.05.2017 - 75651/11
NIKOGHOSYAN v. ARMENIA
EGMR, 03.11.2016 - 25250/16
SVYSTUN AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 09.01.2014 - 7070/04
SEMYANISTY AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 13.06.2013 - 42953/04
KISELYOV v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 26.07.2012 - 703/05
KHARUK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 17.11.2016 - 20427/06
VOLOBUYEVA v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 14.06.2016 - 46969/09
PETROVA v. BULGARIA
EGMR, 17.01.2013 - 7158/04
EGMR, 18.12.2012 - 7321/05
ALPATOV AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 644/05
LAZEBNA v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
EGMR, 29.09.2016 - 4939/08
KOROL v. UKRAINE
EGMR, 05.06.2012 - 38083/04
SMIRNOV v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
EGMR, 10.04.2012 - 39896/05
DEMCHENKO v. UKRAINE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS
EGMR, 21.02.2012 - 26316/09