Volltextveröffentlichung

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte

  VORONKOV v. RUSSIA

  Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Enforcement proceedings;Article 6-1 - Access to court);Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Protection of property (Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1 - Peaceful enjoyment of possessions) ...

Sonstiges

• Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (Verfahrensmitteilung)

  [ENG]

Wird zitiert von ... (8)Neu Zitiert selbst (1)

• EGMR - 45886/07

  [FRE]

  Auszug aus EGMR, 30.07.2015 - 39678/03

  Where it is clear from the outset, however, that no effective remedy is available to the applicant, the period runs from the date of the acts or measures complained of, or from the date of knowledge of that act or its effect on or prejudice to the applicant (see, as a recent authority, Mocanu and Others v. Romania [GC], nos. 10865/09, 45886/07 and 32431/08, §§ 258-59, ECHR 2014 (extracts), with further references).

• EGMR, 08.03.2022 - 34336/10

  OOO TRUZHENIK-89 AND OOO FIRMA MOAZ v. RUSSIA

  Further, having regard to its settled case-law (see Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015), the Court awards each applicant company EUR 2, 000, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and dismisses the remainder of the claims under this head.
• EGMR, 06.12.2018 - 54430/08

  MATVEYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
• EGMR, 06.03.2018 - 9430/06

  TUPITSINA AND BABOSHINA v. RUSSIA

  While there are obvious distinctions as regards different continuing situations (ibid.), the Court considers that the applicant must, in any event, introduce his or her complaint "without undue delay", once it becomes apparent that there is no realistic hope of a favourable outcome for or progress in his complaints at the domestic level in the foreseeable future (ibid.; see also, Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, § 38, 30 July 2015, with further references).

 
• EGMR, 12.12.2017 - 10535/09

  INDERKINY v. RUSSIA

  As to the non-pecuniary damage, the Court considers it reasonable and equitable to award the applicants jointly EUR 2, 000, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage (Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 14.03.2017 - 26920/09

  KARPESH v. RUSSIA

  The Court also considers it reasonable and equitable to award the applicant EUR 2, 000, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage (Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 15.10.2019 - 64098/09

  KUZHELEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

  As regards the award in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and even assuming that the reference to the delayed payment of salary by the FGUP could be regarded as acknowledgment of a violation, the award of EUR 22 was manifestly unreasonable in comparison with the awards made by the Court in similar cases (see, for example, Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015).
• EGMR, 13.12.2016 - 19208/13

  POPOVA v. RUSSIA

  While there are obvious distinctions as regards different continuing situations (ibid.), the Court considers that the applicant must, in any event, introduce his or her complaint "without undue delay", once it becomes apparent that there is no realistic hope of a favourable outcome for or progress in his complaints at the domestic level in the foreseeable future (ibid.; see also, Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, § 38, 30 July 2015, with further references).
• EGMR, 17.01.2017 - 22094/05

  KIM AND RYNDINA v. RUSSIA

  As to non-pecuniary damage, the Court considers it reasonable and equitable to award EUR 2, 000, plus any tax that may be chargeable, to the first applicant (see Voronkov v. Russia, no. 39678/03, §§ 68-69, 30 July 2015).