YAKUBOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA and 24 other applications
2025-02-06T00:00:00
Published on 24 February 2025
 
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 2972/15
Oleksandr Oleksandrovych YAKUBOV and Others against Russia
and 24 other applications
(see table appended)
PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the applications on 6 February 2025, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the applications should be given to the Government of Russia.
In some applications, other complaints were raised. Their examination has been adjourned, or they have been struck out of the Court’s list of cases or declared inadmissible by the Court, sitting in a single-judge formation, assisted by a rapporteur as provided for in Article 24 § 2 of the Convention.
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER
The applications concern complaints raised under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention relating to tribunal not established by law which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) [GC], nos. 20958/14 and 38334/18, §§ 943-46 and 1011-22, 25 June 2024).
 
APPENDIX – STATEMENT OF FACTS
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(“tribunal not established by law”)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth/registration
 
Representative’s name and location
Summary of facts
Type of proceedings
Relevant domestic decision
Date
Other complaints under well-established case-law
   2972/15
17/12/2014
Oleksandr Oleksandrovych YAKUBOV
1951
 
Sergiy Volodymyrovych KUZMENKO
1978
 
Oleksandr Ivanovych SAKHNO
1974
 
Dmytro Ivanovych Borodkin
Kyiv
The applicants, members of a cooperative, asked a court to uphold changes to the structure and management of a cooperative, including the election of the first applicant as the chairman. These changes were upheld by Ukrainian courts before 2014, overruled by Russian “courts” in Crimea.
civil
"Appeal Court of the city of Sevastopol", 10/11/2014
 
   9857/15
04/02/2015
Ruslan Nikolayevich CHEREPNIN
1980
 
Roman Yuriyovych Martynovskyy
Kyiv
The applicant is a defendant in debt recovery civil proceedings. In 2002, the Leninsky District Court of Sevastopol lifted an interim measure concerning the foreclosure of the applicant’s apartment. The applicant received a copy of the decision in 2013 and appealed against it. On 24 April 2014 the "Sevastopol City Court of Appeal" dismissed his appeal on the merits and the subsequent cassation appeal was rejected.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 07/08/2014
 
   16390/15
28/03/2015
Ayshe Abduramanovna BABAYEVA
1941
 
 
 
The applicant, a formerly deported Crimean Tatar, sought to receive rehabilitation documents with respective benefits, to no avail.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 28/10/2014
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law;
 
Art. 14 - prohibition of discrimination - discrimination by Russian authorities on the grounds of the applicant’s ethnic origin (Crimean Tatar).
   41806/15
11/08/2015
Anatoliy Fedorovich RYABOKON
1944
Died in 2018
 
Heir:
Yuriy Anatolyevich
RYABOKON
Born in 1971
 
Yuriy Anatolyevich Ryabokon
Kyiv
The applicant, a co-owner of the mortgaged property, sought the invalidation of a mortgage agreement; his claims were dismissed in three instances of judicial review.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 13/02/2015
 
   44753/15
03/09/2015
UKRAINSKIY FINANSOVO-PROMYSHLENNYY KONTSERN UFPK
 
 
 
The applicant company sought to recover a debt owed to it by another company in the process of bankruptcy, initiated under the Ukrainian law. Russian courts declined to transfer the case to the relevant court in Ukraine with jurisdiction over the matter.
other (military, commercial)
“Commercial Court of the Republic of Crimea”, 10/07/2015
 
   59289/15
18/11/2015
Yelena Aleksandrovna RYSHCHUK
1964
 
 
 
The applicant, a former nurse at a military sanatorium under the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine, was asked to voluntarily resign to take up the same position under Russian law. However, when she re-applied for the job, her application was rejected, prompting her to file a complaint with the court. The "court" of first instance partially upheld her claim, declaring her dismissal unlawful and awarding her 3,000 Russian roubles (RUB) in non-pecuniary damages from the sanatorium. She pursued the remaining claims for reinstatement, compensation for lost wages, and discrimination in higher “courts”, but her efforts were unsuccessful.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 06/10/2015
 
   19795/16
14/03/2016
Shakhin Alliyevich MAMEDOV
1970
 
 
 
The applicant was convicted for murder on 26/12/2014 by the "Central District Court of Simferopol" and sentenced to life imprisonment under Russian law. His appeals were unsuccessful.
criminal
"Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea", 05/03/2018
 
   76870/16
24/11/2016
Roza Ivanovna KAVALEROVA
1941
 
 
 
The applicant, a co-owner of a flat together with her son’s family, sought to confirm her title under the Russian law with a view to subsequently have an ownership certificate issued in her name; to no avail.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 28/09/2016
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
   25219/17
14/03/2017
Mykhaylo Oleksiyovych SHCHUR
1964
 
 
 
The applicant, who declined Russian nationality, initiated two sets of domestic proceedings, both of which were unsuccessful:
(1) Case no. 2-647/2015, seeking to invalidate the applicant’s contracts with "Krymgazseti" on the grounds that it was not a legal successor of "Krymgaz", the Ukrainian gas provider prior to 2014;
(2) Case no. 2-365/2016, alleging discrimination and seeking to halt actions by a Russian commercial bank, which had repeatedly refused to process transactions for the applicant due to the absence of the required documents, including proof of residence status in Crimea, a Russian tax ID, and a Russian phone number.
civil
(1) "Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea", 29/09/2016;
 
(2) "Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea", 14/03/2017.
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law,
 
Art. 14 - prohibition of discrimination - in connection with the second set of proceedings: discrimination by Russian authorities on the grounds of the applicant’s nationality and pro-Ukrainian position.
 20411/18
18/04/2018
Yuriy Georgiyovych GAVRYLYUK
1974
 
 
 
The applicant was denied entry to Crimea at the so-called border and subsequently challenged the decision in court. Due to disrupted postal connections between Ukraine and Crimea, the applicant, residing in Ukraine, attempted to submit his cassation appeal via email. However, the "Presidium of the Supreme Court of Crimea" rejected the appeal on 27/10/2017 for failure to comply with the procedural requirements. Further attempts to challenge this decision were unsuccessful.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 02/02/2018
 
 26225/18
23/05/2018
Anatoliy Viktorovich BROVKO
1950
 
Ruslan Valentinovich TARASOV
1900
 
 
 
The first applicant is an owner of a garage; the second applicant built an extension to it, allegedly without authorisation. They claimed restoration of the electricity supply to the garage.
civil
 Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 01/12/2017
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 46034/18
11/09/2018
Aleksandr Nikolayevich KOZAK
1961
 
 
 
The applicant’s driving licence was suspended, and he was fined for refusing to re-register his car under the Russian legislation. The applicant sought restoration of the time-limit to appeal against the above decisions but to no avail.
administrative
“Razdolnoye District Court of the Republic of Crimea”
13/03/2018
 
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law,
 
Art. 14 - prohibition of discrimination - the applicant alleged that he was discriminated against because of his opinion and his being part of the Ukrainian minority in Crimea.
 55094/18
08/11/2018
Sergey Nikolayevich ZYKOV
1955
 
 
 
The applicant sought to recover his arrested bank deposits due to termination of a criminal case against him and initiated two sets of proceedings on different grounds, both unsuccessful in “courts”: 1) recovery of lost profit, and 2) compensation for damage caused by the unlawful prosecution.
civil
(1) Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 11/05/2018;
 
(2) Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 18/10/2018
 
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 12725/19
25/02/2019
Sandi BREZOVNIK
1970
 
Yana Valeriyivna Sokolova
Kharkiv
The applicant, a Slovenian national, was living in Kharkiv, Ukraine at the time the domestic proceedings in his case were pending in Crimea. As a borrower under a loan agreement, the debtor’s property in Yalta, Crimea, was designated as security for the debt. A mortgage agreement with deferred effect was concluded concerning this property, but the applicant never registered ownership of it. After unsuccessful attempts to enforce the debt in both Ukraine and Russia, the applicant filed a civil claim with the "Yalta City Court" on 20/04/2015. Subsequently, his claim was merged with another case concerning the same property, and the applicant was granted the status of a third party with independent claims. The applicant’s claims were dismissed, and his subsequent appeals were unsuccessful.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 30/11/2018
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 27847/19
08/05/2019
Valeriy Ivanovych YERCHENKO
1951
 
 
 
The applicant sought enforcement of the Yalta City Court’s decision of 20/12/2012 by the Russian authorities. After unsuccessful attempts to enforce the 2012 decision, the applicant-initiated proceedings in 2018 before the Russian courts, specifically requesting a change in the manner of enforcement and the replacement of a party in the enforcement proceedings, but these efforts were unsuccessful.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 16/11/2018
 
 48764/19
09/09/2019
Oleg Valentinovich GOLOVKOV
1971
 
 
 
The applicant unsuccessfully sought compensation from a depositors’ protection fund in Crimea for his bank deposit made in Ukrainian bank between 2011 and 2013.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 27/03/2019
 
 12702/20
26/02/2020
Oleg Anatolyevich FROLOV
1976
 
 
 
The applicant’s Ukrainian military service book was confiscated when a Russian military service book was issued by the Russian military authorities. He filed a claim seeking protection of his dignity and rights, along with compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by the allegedly unlawful actions of the military authorities. On appeal, the military commission was ordered to return the applicant’s Ukrainian military service book, while the remainder of his complaints were dismissed.
civil
"Supreme Court of the Republic of Crimea", 26/09/2019
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 21667/20
07/05/2020
ARENDNOYE PREDPRIYATIYE YALTAMONOLITSTROY
2011
 
 
 
The applicant’s company challenged the tax authorities’ refusal to grant it a state registration as a legal entity under the Russian law.
other (military, commercial)
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 08/11/2019
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 1881/21
24/02/2021
Andrey Petrovich SANDOVSKIY
1966
 
 
 
The applicant, a Ukrainian national residing in Crimea, was apprehended on 17/12/2014 at the so-called border between Ukraine and Crimea while returning from Lviv and subsequently arrested. On 05/11/2015 he was convicted of smuggling precursors across the Russian border and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment. The applicant’s appeal against his conviction was unsuccessful.
criminal
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 12/11/2020
 
 24035/21
12/03/2021
Oleg Anatolyevich FROLOV
1976
 
 
 
The applicant, a dual Ukrainian and a Russian national residing in Crimea, had his Ukrainian driving license confiscated by the traffic police in Crimea upon receiving a Russian driving licence. Relying on Ukrainian domestic law and international legal provisions, the applicant pursued civil proceedings to recover his Ukrainian driving license from the Russian authorities, but his efforts were unsuccessful.
civil
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 23/09/2020
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 52902/21
19/12/2019
Mykhaylo Oleksiyovych SHCHUR
1964
 
 
 
The applicant complained domestically that he had been discriminated against by various state authorities in the Crimea on account of his political views and his lack of a Russian passport or other documents, with the result that he had been refused various services. In this regard, he initiated a number of proceedings challenging the actions of the authorities and seeking non-pecuniary damages. These proceedings were unsuccessful and resulted in a single decision № M-573/2018, in which the applicant’s cassation was denied.
civil
"Supreme Court of Crimea", 22/07/2019
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law;
 
Art. 14 - prohibition of discrimination - the applicant alleged discrimination based on his political views, refusal to accept Russian nationality, language.
 7380/22
05/11/2021
Viktor Vladimirovich KRETININ
1955
 
Sergey Petrovich Maryushin
Verkhorechye
The applicant asked a “court” to declare defendant’s buildings unauthorised constructions and to authorise their demolition because his right to unrestricted passage was impaired.
civil
Forth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, 15/06/2021
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.
 30200/22
21/04/2022
Mykhaylo Oleksiyovych SHCHUR
1964
 
 
 
The applicant, acting as a private plaintiff in a criminal case that ultimately resulted in an acquittal upheld on appeal faced separate proceedings regarding legal fees incurred in the case. By a decision of the "Krasnoperekopsk District Court" on 27/07/2021, the applicant was ordered to pay RUB 6,000. Subsequent appeals against this decision were unsuccessful.
civil
Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction, 18/03/2022
Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions
 - the applicant alleged that the court-ordered obligation to pay RUB 6,000 in compensation for legal fees is enforceable in Crimea.
 28515/24
29/05/2014
Dmitriy Yevgenyevich RUBLEV
1981
Died in 2016
 
Heir
Yevgeniy Vladimirovich
RUBLEV
Born in 1952
 
 
 
The applicant challenged the prosecutor’s decision to suspend criminal proceedings, where the applicant was a suspect. In another set of proceedings, the applicant unsuccessfully sought non-pecuniary damage on account of omissions by the law enforcement authorities in the same criminal case.
civil
(1) Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 16/08/2016;
 
(2) Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 18/08/2016
 
 29060/24
30/12/2014
Nikolay Aleksandrovich BELOBORODOV
1982
 
 
 
The applicant, a former police officer, was convicted of abuse of authority and bribery, and sentenced to 6 years 6 months’ imprisonment by the Zaliznychnyy District Court of Simferopol on 14/12/2012. The applicant’s appeals were unsuccessful and while his sentence was upheld, it was requalified under Russian criminal law provisions.
criminal
Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, 07/08/2014
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.