BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

FOURTH SECTION

CASE OF OLEKSANDR VOLKOV v. UKRAINE

(Application no. 21722/11)

JUDGMENT

(Just satisfaction and striking out)

STRASBOURG

6 February 2018

This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine,

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:

Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,
Ganna Yudkivska,
Faris Vehabović,
Carlo Ranzoni,
Georges Ravarani,
Marko Bošnjak,
Péter Paczolay, judges,
and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 16 January 2018,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in an application (no. 21722/11) 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 Oleksandr Fedorovych Volkov ("the applicant"), on 30 March 2011.

2. In a judgment delivered on 9 January 2013 ("the principal judgment"), the Court held that there had been several violations of Article 6 § 1 and Article 8 of the Convention, on account of the applicant's dismissal from his post as judge of the Supreme Court. Under Article 41 of the Convention, the Court awarded the applicant 6,000 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR 12,000 in respect of costs and expenses and dismissed the remainder of his claims under those heads (see Oleksandr Volkov v. Ukraine, no. 21722/11, ECHR 2013).

3. Since the question of the application of Article 41 of the Convention was not ready for decision as regards pecuniary damage, the Court reserved it and invited the Government and the applicant to submit, within three months, their written observations on that issue and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement they might reach (ibid., § 211 and point 10 of the operative provisions).

4. The applicant and the Government each filed observations.

5. On 15 September and 2 October 2017 the Court received declarations duly signed by both parties, whereby the Government undertook to pay the applicant 1,430,212.32 Ukrainian hryvnias[1] for pecuniary damage, plus any tax chargeable to him, and the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts giving rise to the application. This amount would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the 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 payment would constitute the final resolution of the case.

THE LAW

6. The Court takes formal note of the above agreement and considers that it is equitable within the meaning of Rule 75 § 4 of the Rules of Court.

7. In the light of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.

8. Accordingly, the remainder of the application should be struck out of the list.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Takes formal note of the agreement between the parties and the arrangements made to ensure compliance with the undertakings given therein;

2. Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 6 February 2018, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Andrea TamiettiVincent A. De Gaetano
Deputy RegistrarPresident