Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 5497/18

The Court further notes that pursuant to Articles 332 and 333 of the CAP applications for a supervisory review may be lodged within three months of the date on which the first-instance judgment became final and that the supervisory proceedings fall within the exclusive domain of the Presidium of the Supreme Court, thus preventing the lower courts" judgments from being challenged indefinitely before different courts (see, by contrast, Martynets v. Russia (dec.), no. 29612/09, ECHR 2009 and Denisov v. Russia, (dec.), no. 33408/03, 6 May 2004).

Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 5497/18

The Court further notes that pursuant to Articles 332 and 333 of the CAP applications for a supervisory review may be lodged within three months of the date on which the first-instance judgment became final and that the supervisory proceedings fall within the exclusive domain of the Presidium of the Supreme Court, thus preventing the lower courts" judgments from being challenged indefinitely before different courts (see, by contrast, Martynets v. Russia (dec.), no. 29612/09, ECHR 2009 and Denisov v. Russia, (dec.), no. 33408/03, 6 May 2004).

Auszug aus EGMR, 20.11.2018 - 5497/18

In order to comply with the rule, applicants should normally use remedies which are available and sufficient to afford redress in respect of the breaches alleged (see, among other authorities, Selmouni v. France [GC], no. 25803/94, § 74, ECHR 1999-V).