FIFTH SECTION      CASE OF CHUMAK v. UKRAINE (Application no. 60790/12)             JUDGMENT    STRASBOURG 19 May 2016  This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.In the case of Chumak v. Ukraine,The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of: André Potocki, President, Ganna Yudkivska, Síofra O’Leary, judges, and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar,Having deliberated in private on 26 April 2016,Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:PROCEDURE1. The case originated in an application (no. 60790/12) against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Ukrainian national, Mr Mykhaylo Mykhaylovych Chumak (“the applicant”), on 5 September 2012.2. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by successive Agents.3. On 11 September 2014 the complaints concerning the length and effectiveness of the investigation into the death of the applicant’s wife, and the length of examination of his civil claim within the context of the criminal proceedings and after them were communicated to the Government and the remainder of the application was declared inadmissible pursuant to Rule 54 § 3 of the Rules of Court.4. Having regard to the Government’s observations and in view of its well-established case-law as regards the subject-matter of the application (see, for example, Reus and Others v. Ukraine [Committee], no. 40587/07, § 29, 16 October 2014), the Court considers it appropriate to examine the application in a Committee of three judges pursuant to Article 28 of the Convention.THE FACTSI. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE5. The applicant was born in 1975 and lives in Shostka.6. On 13 November 2003 the applicant’s wife died as a result of a traffic accident caused by Mr V. whose car collided with a horse-drawn carriage in which the applicant’s wife was travelling. The police examined the scene of the accident immediately. The medical examination of Mr V. was also conducted.7. On 17 November 2003 the Shostka District Police Department instituted a criminal investigation into the road traffic accident.8. On 27 December 2003, after a number of forensic medical examinations and on the basis of witnesses’ testimonies, the investigative officer terminated the criminal proceedings on the ground that it was impossible to establish who was responsible for the accident. On 4 February 2004 the investigative officer of the Shostka District Police Department decided to resume the investigation on account of its incompleteness and the necessity to conduct further investigative actions.9. Between February 2004 and April 2005 six more decisions to discontinue the criminal proceedings for lack of corpus delicti in the driver’s actions were taken (on 5 February, 5 March, 15 April, 17 August, 7 October, 23 December 2004).

Outcome for Article 2: violation