(Application no. 26675/07)
16 April 2009
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 Bykov v. Ukraine,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Rait Maruste, President,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, judges,
Stanislav Shevchuk, ad hoc judge,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 24 March 2009,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
A. Background information
B. Civil proceedings
C. Administrative proceedings
I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 6 § 1 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION
“In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal...”
He also complained that there was no effective remedy for his complaint that the length of the civil proceedings in his case had been excessive. He relied in that respect on Article 13 of the Convention which reads as follows:
“Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.”
claim against “Obyednannya Azot” challenging the reason for dismissal – from January 2002 to 23 December 2004;
claim against “Obyednannya Azot” for compensation for work-related illness – from January 2002 to 15 February 2008;
claim against “Obyednannya Azot” for compensation for unlawful dismissal – from 19 January 2007 to 15 February 2008.
As to the administrative proceedings, the Court observes that the parties did not make any particular submissions in that regard and therefore it finds no reason to examine these proceedings separately.
1. Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
There has accordingly been a breach of Article 6 § 1.
2. Article 13 of the Convention
There has accordingly also been a breach of Article 13.
III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
B. Costs and expenses
C. Default interest
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 800 (eight hundred euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR 500 (five hundred euros) in respect of costs and expenses, to be converted into national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant;
(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 16 April 2009, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Claudia Westerdiek Rait Maruste
1 About 206.06 euro (EUR) at the material time.
2 About EUR 511.37.
3 About EUR 491.28.
4 About EUR 15.70.
5 About EUR 4.4.
6 About EUR 12.18.