CASE OF DENISOV v. UKRAINE
Hearing: Denisov v. Ukraine (no. 76639/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2017-10-18 00:00:00)
Application no.: 76639/11
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2018-09-25 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2018:0925JUD007663911
Respondent state: UKR
Articles of the Convention: 6;6-1;8;8-1;35;35-3-a;41
Judges: Alena Poláčková;André Potocki;Angelika Nußberger;Carlo Ranzoni;Erik Møse;Ganna Yudkivska;Georgios A. Serghides;Guido Raimondi;Helena Jäderblom;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Marko Bošnjak;Mārtiņš Mits;Robert Spano;Vincent A. De Gaetano;Yonko Grozev;Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer
Represented by: GAVRON J. ; HALBAN A.
Strasbourg case-law cited: A. v. Norway, no. 28070/06, §§ 63-64, 9 April 2009;Albert and Le Compte v. Belgium, 10 February 1983, § 29, Series A no. 58;Alexandre v. Portugal, no. 33197/09, §§ 54 and 55, 20 November 2012;Anheuser-Busch Inc. v. Portugal [GC], no. 73049/01, § 64, ECHR 2007 I;Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC], no. 39954/08, § 83, 7 February 2012;Bărbulescu v. Romania [GC], no. 61496/08, ECHR 2017 (extracts);Bayatyan v. Armenia [GC], no. 23459/03, § 135, ECHR 2011;Bayer v. Germany, no. 8453/04, 16 July 2009;Bédat v. Switzerland [GC], no. 56925/08, § 72, ECHR 2016;Bigaeva v. Greece, no. 26713/05, §§ 22-25, 28 May 2009;Bochan v. Ukraine (no. 2) [GC], no. 22251/08, § 42, ECHR 2015;Borysiewicz v. Poland, no. 71146/01, § 51, 1 July 2008;Boulois v. Luxembourg [GC], no. 37575/04, § 90, ECHR 2012;Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, § 86, ECHR 2015;Bryan v. the United Kingdom, 22 November 1995, §§ 44-47, Series A no. 335 A;Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 114, 10 March 2009;Campagnano v. Italy, no. 77955/01, §§ 53 and 54, ECHR 2006 IV;Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014;Cooper v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 48843/99, § 104, ECHR 2003 XII;De Tommaso v. Italy [GC], no. 43395/09, § 154, ECHR 2017 (extracts);Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no. 64569/09, § 137, ECHR 2015;Dubetska and Others v. Ukraine, no. 30499/03, § 105, 10 February 2011;Dzhidzheva Trendafilova v. Bulgaria (dec.), no. 12628/09, § 38, 9 October 2012;El Kaada v. Germany, no. 2130/10, § 41, 12 November 2015;Enea v. Italy [GC], no. 74912/01, § 103, ECHR 2009;Erkan v. Turkey (dec.), no. 29840/03, 24 March 2005;Erményi v. Hungary, no. 22254/14, §§ 30 and 31, 22 November 2016;Fadeyeva v. Russia, no. 55723/00, §§ 68 and 69, ECHR 2005 IV;Fernández Martínez v. Spain [GC], no. 56030/07, §§ 109-113, ECHR 2014 (extracts);Folgerø and Others v. Norway [GC], no. 15472/02, § 112, ECHR 2007 III;Gäfgen v. Germany [GC], no. 22978/05, § 88, ECHR 2010;Gagliano Giorgi v. Italy, no. 23563/07, § 56, ECHR 2012 (extracts);Ganci v. Italy, no. 41576/98, § 25, ECHR 2003 XI;Gillberg v. Sweden [GC], no. 41723/06, §§ 64-74, 3 April 2012;Giusti v. Italy, no. 13175/03, § 34, 18 October 2011;Grimkovskaya v. Ukraine, no. 38182/03, § 58, 21 July 2011;Harabin v. Slovakia (dec.), no. 62584/00, 29 June 2004;Hristovi v. Bulgaria, no. 42697/05, § 109, 11 October 2011;Jalloh v. Germany [GC], no. 54810/00, § 67, ECHR 2006 IX;Jankauskas v. Lithuania (no. 2), no. 50446/09, 27 June 2017;Jeunesse v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 12738/10, § 135, 3 October 2014;Kamenos v. Cyprus, no. 147/07, § 88, 31 October 2017;Károly Nagy v. Hungary [GC], no. 56665/09, § 62, ECHR 2017;Kulykov and Others v. Ukraine, nos. 5114/09 and 17 others, §§ 118 and 132, 19 January 2017;Kyprianou v. Cyprus [GC], no. 73797/01, § 119, ECHR 2005 XIII;Le Compte, Van Leuven and De Meyere v. Belgium, 23 June 1981, Series A no. 43;Lekavičienė v. Lithuania, no. 48427/09, 27 June 2017;Lupeni Greek Catholic Parish and Others v. Romania [GC], no. 76943/11, § 71, ECHR 2016;Maktouf and Damjanović v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, § 49, ECHR 2013 (extracts);Martinie v. France [GC], no. 58675/00, § 62, ECHR 2006-VI;Medžlis Islamske Zajednice Brčko and Others v. Bosnia and Herzegovina [GC], nos. 17224/11, §§ 76 and 105-106, ECHR 2017;Micallef v. Malta [GC], no. 17056/06, § 93, ECHR 2009;Morice v. France [GC], no. 29369/10, § 78, ECHR 2015;Murray v. the Netherlands [GC], no. 10511/10, § 134, ECHR 2016;Naidin v. Romania, no. 38162/07, 21 October 2014;Niemietz v. Germany, 16 December 1992, § 29, Series A no. 251 B;Obst v. Germany, no. 425/03, 23 September 2010;Ohneberg v. Austria, no. 10781/08, 18 September 2012;Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, ECHR 2013;Özpınar v. Turkey, no. 20999/04, 19 October 2010;Paluda v. Slovakia, no. 33392/12, § 34, 23 May 2017;Pfeifer v. Austria, no. 12556/03, § 35, 15 November 2007;Philis v. Greece (no. 2), 27 June 1997, § 45, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997 IV;Polanco Torres and Movilla Polanco v. Spain, no. 34147/06, §§ 40 and 44, 21 September 2010;Poposki and Duma v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, nos. 69916/10 and 36531/11, § 48, 7 January 2016;Pullar v. the United Kingdom, 10 June 1996, § 32, Reports 1996 III;Regner v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 35289/11, ECHR 2017;Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 117, ECHR 2005 X;S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04, § 66, ECHR 2008;Şahin Kuş v. Turkey, no. 33160/04, §§ 34-37, 7 June 2016;Savitskyy v. Ukraine, no. 38773/05, §§ 143-145, 26 July 2012;Schüth v. Germany, no. 1620/03, ECHR 2010;Sidabras and Džiautas v. Lithuania, nos. 55480/00 and 59330/00, §§ 42-50, ECHR 2004 VIII;Singartiyski and Others v. Bulgaria, no. 48284/07, § 54, 18 October 2011;Smith and Grady v. the United Kingdom, nos. 33985/96 and 33986/96, ECHR 1999 VI;Sodan v. Turkey, no. 18650/05, §§ 43-50, 2 February 2016;Söderman v. Sweden [GC], no. 5786/08, § 126, ECHR 2013;Stummer v. Austria [GC], no. 37452/02, § 82, ECHR 2011;Sturua v. Georgia, no. 45729/05, § 27, 28 March 2017;Taşkın and Others v. Turkey, no. 46117/99, § 133, ECHR 2004 X;Tsfayo v. the United Kingdom, no. 60860/00, §§ 42-43, 14 November 2006;Udovičić v. Croatia, no. 27310/09, § 137, 24 April 2014;Varnava and Others v. Turkey [GC], nos. 16064/90 and 8 others, §§ 210-11, ECHR 2009;Zalli v. Albania, no. 52531/07, 8 February 2011

Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Ratione materiae;Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings;Article 6-1 - Impartial tribunal;Independent tribunal);Non-pecuniary damage - award (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: FALSE