THIRD SECTION

CASE OF KULYUK AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 47032/06 and 3 others – see appended list)

JUDGMENT
(Revision)

STRASBOURG

17 January 2017

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Kulyuk and Others v. Russia (request for revision of the judgment of 8 December 2015),
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
	Helena Jäderblom, President,
	Dmitry Dedov,
	Branko Lubarda, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 13 December 2016,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1.  The case originated in four applications (nos. 47032/06, 6415/07, 39249/08 and 39251/08) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by four Russian nationals (“the applicants”).
2.  In a judgment delivered on 8 December 2015, the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention in respect of the quashing of the judgments in the applicants’ favour by way of supervisory review proceedings and the delayed execution of the same judgments prior to their quashing. The Court also decided to award each applicant 5,000 euros (EUR) in respect of both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and 2,067 Russian roubles (RUB) to one of the applicants, Ms Kulyuk Nadezhda Georgiyevna, for costs and expenses and dismissed the remainder of the claims for just satisfaction.
3.  On 24 February 2016 the representative of Ms Kulyuk Nadezhda Georgiyevna informed the Court that the applicant had died on 19 May 2014, which is before the Court delivered its judgment. The representative further requested the Court to award the sums granted as a just satisfaction to the late applicant’s daughter. On 10 June 2016 the late applicant’s representative, in reply to the Registry’s letter dated on 14 April 2016, submitted evidence in respect of the acceptance of the late applicant’s succession by her daughter, Ms A.I. Chorniy.
4.  On 30 August 2016 the Court considered the possibility of revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court and decided to give the Government six weeks to submit any observations. In a letter of 18 October 2016 the Government informed the Court that the late applicant’s daughter has standing to replace her late mother.
THE LAW
Article I.	THE REQUEST FOR REVISION
5.  Ms A.I. Chorniy, the daughter of one of the applicants, requested revision of the judgment of 8 December 2015, which she would be unable to have executed because her mother, Ms Kulyuk Nadezhda Georgiyevna, had died before the judgment had been adopted. She was the heir and should therefore receive the sums awarded to the deceased.
6.  The Government submitted that the late applicant’s daughter has standing to replace her late mother.
7.  The Court considers that the judgment of 8 December 2015 should be revised pursuant to Rule 80 of the Rules of Court, the relevant parts of which provide:
“A party may, in the event of the discovery of a fact which might by its nature have a decisive influence and which, when a judgment was delivered, was unknown to the Court and could not reasonably have been known to that party, request the Court ... to revise that judgment.
...”
8.  It accordingly decides to award Ms A.I. Chorniy the amount it previously awarded to her mother Ms Kulyuk Nadezhda Georgiyevna, namely EUR 5,000 in respect of both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and RUB 2,067 for costs and expenses.
9.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
1.  Decides to revise its judgment of 8 December 2015 in so far as it concerns the claim made by the deceased applicant Ms Kulyuk Nadezhda Georgiyevna under Article 41 of the Convention;

2.  Holds
(a)  that the respondent State is to pay Ms A.I. Chorniy, within three months the following amounts:
(i)  EUR 5,000 (five thousand euros) to be converted into the currency of the respondent State, plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of both pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage;
(ii)  RUB 2,067 (two thousand and sixty-seven Russian roubles) in respect of costs and expenses;
(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 17 January 2017, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
	Fatoş Aracı	Helena Jäderblom
	Deputy Registrar	President

APPENDIX

	Application no.	Application name	
1.	47032/06	Kulyuk v. Russia	
2.	6415/07	Dronov v. Russia	
3.	39249/08	Shapiyev v. Russia	
4.	39251/08	Samedov v. Russia