Mariya Yukhymivna LAZEBNA & Ors v Ukraine - 644/05 [2012] ECHR 779 (10 April 2012)

Mariya Yukhymivna LAZEBNA & Ors v Ukraine - 644/05 [2012] ECHR 779 (10 April 2012)

The Government's unilateral declarations acknowledge the violations, offer adequate compensation comparable to Court awards, and undertake to enforce the judgments, thus it is no longer justified to continue examination of these complaints. Respect for human rights does not require further examination. Remaining...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] ECHR 779
Parties
Applicants: Mariya Yukhymivna Lazebna and others; Respondent: Ukraine
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
10 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Joined Applications (31) Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility and Striking Out
Outcome
Applications joined; complaints about delayed enforcement struck out; remainder declared inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Delayed Enforcement of Domestic Judgments, Right to a Fair Trial, Effective Remedy
Human Rights Law Civil Procedure Delayed Enforcement of Domestic Judgments Right to a Fair Trial Effective Remedy

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mariya Yukhymivna Lazebna and others

Applicants

Ukraine

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Joined Applications (31) Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility and Striking Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delayed enforcement of final domestic judgments in favour of the applicants violated the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the Government's unilateral declarations and compensation offers justify striking out the applications

Ratio Decidendi

The Government's unilateral declarations acknowledge the violations, offer adequate compensation comparable to Court awards, and undertake to enforce the judgments, thus it is no longer justified to continue examination of these complaints. Respect for human rights does not require further examination. Remaining complaints are manifestly ill-founded.

Court Disposition

Applications joined; complaints about delayed enforcement struck out; remainder declared inadmissible.

Orders

  • Applications joined.
  • Complaints about delayed enforcement of domestic judgments struck out under Article 37 § 1 (c) ECHR.