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!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
European Court of Human Rights |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> SMETANYUK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE - 32734/19 (Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : Fifth Section Committee) [2024] ECHR 560 (20 June 2024) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2024/560.html Cite as: [2024] ECHR 560 |
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF SMETANYUK AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
(Applications nos. 32734/19 and 3 others -
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
20 June 2024
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Smetanyuk and Others v. Ukraine,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Carlo Ranzoni, President,
Mārtiņš Mits,
María Elósegui, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 30 May 2024,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
1. The case originated in applications against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Ukrainian Government ("the Government") were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
THE LAW
4. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
5. The applicants complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the "reasonable time" requirement and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention.
6. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicants and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicants in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
7. In the leading case of Karnaushenko v. Ukraine (no. 23853/02, 30 November 2006), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
8. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the "reasonable time" requirement.
9. The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 and of Article 13 of the Convention.
11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Karnaushenko, cited above, §§ 70 and 75), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 20 June 2024, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Carlo Ranzoni
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil proceedings and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law)
Application no. Date of introduction | Applicant's name Year of birth
| Representative's name and location | Start of proceedings | End of proceedings | Total length Levels of jurisdiction | Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros)[1] | |
06/06/2019 | Vasyl Kazymyrovych SMETANYUK 1971 | Kotyk Roman Vasylyovych Kotykivka | 27/09/2010
| 22/09/2022
| 11 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 27 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction
| 3,600 | |
29/12/2020 | Natalya Mykhaylivna SHCHERBATA 1959 |
| 12/12/2014
| 27/11/2020
| 5 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 16 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction
| 500 | |
12/12/2022 | Yaroslav Volodymyrovych TSEKHMISTER 1968 |
| 04/12/2018
| 20/04/2023
| 4 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 17 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction
| 800 | |
24/03/2023 | Lyudmyla Mykolayivna KOYENYEN 1981 | Pavlyshyn Yuriy Mykolayovych Odesa | 14/09/2012 10/07/2017
| 26/02/2013 13/12/2022
| 5 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 17 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction
| 500 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.