Background
The case combined three applications brought against Ukraine by Oleg Vasylyovych Shytikov, Galyna Yuriyivna Fomina, and Valeriy Viktorovych Vasylenko. They complained that their civil cases had lasted too long and that domestic law provided no effective remedy for that delay.
The proceedings had lasted more than nine years in Shytikov’s case, more than five and a half years in Fomina’s case, and more than three and a half years in Vasylenko’s case. The relevant proceedings were either still pending or, in Vasylenko’s matter, included proceedings that remained pending.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Section unanimously joined the applications, declared them admissible, and found violations of Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention. Applying its established reasonable-time criteria and referring to Karnaushenko v. Ukraine, the Court found no fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the domestic civil proceedings.
The Court also held that the applicants lacked an effective domestic remedy for their excessive-length complaints. Under Article 41, it awarded non-pecuniary damages of EUR 1,800 to Shytikov, EUR 1,500 to Fomina, and EUR 1,200 to Vasylenko, plus any applicable tax, payable within three months.
Key Takeaways
- Civil proceedings that extend for years without adequate justification can breach the Article 6 § 1 reasonable-time guarantee.
- Ukraine violated Article 13 because the applicants had no effective domestic remedy for the delays.
- The Court applied its established Ukraine delay case-law and awarded non-pecuniary damages to each applicant.
Why It Matters
The judgment is a further application of the Court’s settled approach to protracted civil litigation in Ukraine. It confirms that the Convention requires both timely adjudication and an effective domestic avenue to address undue delay.