duche

20 сентября оглашено решение европейского суда по правам человека по делу Юкоса, итак суд решил:

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT
1. Finds by six votes to one that the Court is not barred, pursuant to Article 35 § 2 (b) of the Convention, from examining the merits of the case;
2. Holds by six votes to one that there has been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and 3 (b) of the Convention as regards the 2000 Tax Assessment proceedings on account of the insufficient time available to the applicant company for preparation of the case at first instance and on appeal;
3. Holds by four votes to three that there has been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the 2000-2001 Tax Assessments in the part relating to the imposition and calculation of penalties;
4. Holds unanimously that there has been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 as regards the rest of the 2000-2003 Tax Assessments;
5. Holds unanimously that there has been no violation of Article 14 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1;
6. Dismisses by a majority the Government’s preliminary objection as to the exhaustion of the domestic remedies in respect of the attachment and seizure of the applicant company’s assets pending the enforcement proceedings, the alleged failure by the bailiffs to grant the company access to the case in the enforcement proceedings, the bailiffs’ alleged inaction in respect of the Sibneft shares, the orders to pay a 7% enforcement fee and the circumstances of the valuation and sale of OAO Yuganskneftegaz; and
7. Holds by five votes to two that there has been a violation of the applicant company’s rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the enforcement proceedings against the applicant company in that the domestic authorities failed to strike a fair balance between the legitimate aim of these proceedings and the measures employed;
8. Holds unanimously that there has been no violation of Article 18, taken in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1;
9. Holds unanimously that in view of its previous conclusions under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 the case requires no separate examination under Articles 7 and 13 of the Convention;
10. Holds unanimously that the question of the application of Article 41 is not ready for decision;
accordingly,
(a) reserves the said question in whole;
(b) invites the parties to submit, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, their written observations on the matter and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement that they may reach;
(c) reserves the further procedure and delegates to the President of the Chamber the power to fix the same if need be.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 20 September 2011, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis
Registrar President

http://www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/Homepage_EN

Итог - Россия проиграла, компенсация не установлена, сторонам дано 3 месяца (если решение вступит в законную силу) договориться о компенсации, если не договоряться, суд присудит.

-----------------
Внутри земного шара находится другой шар, который гораздо больше наружного