The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 8 January 2008 as a Chamber composed of: Peer Lorenzen, President, Snejana Botoucharova, Karel Jungwiert, Volodymyr Butkevych, Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska, Rait Maruste, Mark Villiger, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 March 2002, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Nikolay Sergeyevich Gayvoronskiy, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1949 and lives in Dzhankoy. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Mrs Z....
CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE COUNCIL OF EUROPE COUR EUROPÉENNE DES DROITS DE L’HOMME EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS FIFTH SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 18428/02 by Nikolay Sergeyevich GAYVORONSKIY against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 8 January 2008 as a Chamber composed of: Peer Lorenzen, President, Snejana Botoucharova, Karel Jungwiert, Volodymyr Butkevych, Margarita Tsatsa-Nikolovska, Rait Maruste, Mark Villiger, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 March 2002, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Nikolay Sergeyevich Gayvoronskiy, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1949 and lives in Dzhankoy. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Mrs Z. Bortnovska, succeeded by Mrs V. Lutkovska and Mr Y. Zaytsev.
2 GAYVORONSKIY v. UKRAINE DECISION A. The civil dispute concerning construction of a house 1. Background facts Pursuant a contract concluded in June 1992, the applicant advanced 40,000 karbovantsi1 to the State-owned “Zarichny” Farm (Радгосп «Зарічний») for construction of a residential house for his family. According to the text of the contract, the remainder of the funds were to be borrowed from the U.S.S.R. State bank2. The contract did not specify whose responsibility it was to apply for the loan. Neither party secured the loan or otherwise financed the remainder of the construction costs. The plot of land located at the address specified in the construction contract was never formally assigned to the applicant. In 1993 the municipality allocated the applicant a plot for the construction of a house at a different address. He used this plot for growing vegetables. In 1993 the unfinished house, located at the address specified in the construction contract, was allocated to the R. family, who had advanced funding for the construction of a house in 1991. Having invested their personal funds, the R. family continued the construction and moved into the house. By 1999 the Zarichny Farm was privatized, its shares having been distributed between employees and other private persons, and transformed into a collective agricultural enterprise (Колективне сільськогосподарське підприємство). 2. Judicial proceedings In June 1994 the applicant instituted civil proceedings in the Dzhankoy Court (Джанкойський міський суд Автономної республіки Крим), seeking to oblige the Zarichny Farm to fulfil the contract, namely, to finish the construction of the house located at the address specified in it. The R. family were summoned to the proceedings as a third party. The Zarichny Farm ...