 KOLKUTIN v. RUSSIA, 12 July 2016 A violation of Article 5 § 3. KOROVINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 12 July 2016 In respect of all the applicants, that there has been a violation of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the quashing by way of supervisory review proceedings of the judgments in the applicants’ favour. KOTELNIKOV v. RUSSIA, 12 July 2016 A violation of Article 2 under its procedural limb. KRAPIVIN v. RUSSIA, 12 July 2016 No violation of Article 8 of the Convention. PARCHIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 12 July 2016 In respect of all the applicants, that there has been a violation of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the quashing by way of supervisory review proceedings of the final domestic judgments in the applicants’ favour. BADRETDINOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 A violation of Article 3. BARKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 A violation of Article 6. DEVTEROV v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 A violation of Article 5 § 3. POPOV v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 A violation of Article 5 § 1; a violation of Article 5 § 5; a violation of Article 6 § 1; a violation of Article 6 § 1 and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. YEVSTRATOV AND RUDAKOV v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 A violation of Article 5 § 3. YUDIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 19 July 2016 In respect of all applications, that there has been a violation of Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of the non-enforcement of the domestic judgments in the applicants’ favour; in respect of all applications, that there has been a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of the non‑enforcement of the final domestic judgments in the applicants’ favour. ARISTOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These applications disclose a breach of Article 3 concerning the inadequate conditions of detention; a violation as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). BRAZHNIKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These applications disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention. GRECHKIN AND SMIRNOVA v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings; a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings. KHAYBULLAYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings. KOCHIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings; a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings. KUZNETSOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings. MALTSEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings; a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings. SHAMRAYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These applications disclose a breach of Article 13. SYUSYURA AND OVECHKIN v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These applications disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention. VAN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings; a violation of Article 13 on account of the lack of an effective remedy to complain about the excessive length of the proceedings. VORONINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings. WALTER AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 21 July 2016 These complaints disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention; a violation as regards the complaint under Article 5 § 4 raised under well-established case-law of the Court in application no. 21219/15. U.N. v. RUSSIA, 26 July 2016 The applicant’s extradition to Kyrgyzstan would amount to a violation of Article 3; a violation of Article 5 § 4. |
|
|