Late enforcement of a judgment violates the right to a fair trial and protection of property
Vladimirova v. Russia 10.4.2018 (no. 21863/05)
Late execution of a court order to pay compensation for more than two years and negligence of the investigator in the sugar report in order to facilitate its misappropriation. Infringement of the right to property protection and the right to a fair trial due to a late enforcement of a judgment in favor of the applicant’s business.
Article 1 of the First Additional Protocol
Article 6 § 1
The applicant, Alla Vladimirova, is a Russian national who was born in 1957 and lives in Stavropol (Russia).
The case concerned Ms Vladimirova’s grocery retail trade company, Akvilon, and its loss of five tonnes of sugar.
In 2001 Akvilon arranged to sell the batch of sugar to two individuals. However, the transaction went wrong and criminal proceedings were instituted against the individuals on suspicion of misappropriation of Akvilon’s property. These proceedings were suspended in 2007 because it could not be established who was responsible. In the meantime in 2005, Akvilon was awarded compensation for pecuniary damage in commercial proceedings. The commercial courts notably found that the investigator in charge of the criminal case had been negligent when leaving the sugar in storage with the individuals accused of the misappropriation. The award was paid in full in 2007.
Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) and Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing), Ms Vladimirova alleged in particular that the judgment awarding her company damages had remained unenforced for more than two years.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 6 § 1 – on account of the delayed execution of the judgment in favour of the applicant’s company
Violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 – on account of the delayed execution of the judgment in favour of the applicant’s company
Just satisfaction: EUR 1,500 (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 10 (costs and expenses)(echrcaselaw.com editing).