Compensation or Profanity?
Abstract
The author compares the criteria of internal remedy against red tape when considering a case or executing a judgement applied by the European Court of Human Rights and legal guarantees set by the Federal Law of April 30, 2010 № 68-FZ On the Compensation for violating the right to proceedings in due time and right to executing the court ruling in reasonable time. The author concludes on limited legal means to claim compensation for red tape and the limited range of measures to claim compensation for the violated right to a fair trial is interpreted by Russian authorities as a feature of national legal regulation. A legal case on protecting consumer rights is applied by the author to show the case practice of interpreting the provisions of the law in question. The law exposes its inefficiency and new breaches of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1950). The reasons for its inefficiency of the Russian law are kept in its provisions and the procedural rules of studying the requirements to claim compensation for red tape during a trial. On the basis of the Law and its application, the author makes several conclusions. The legal institute of compensation for red tape does not meet the requirements of an efficient relief against red tape and Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the legal decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on the complaints against Russia. Hence, the systematic issue of lentitude of legal trials is not solved in Russia. There is a necessity in removing the inconsistencies as to the requirements of Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention. The case practice of the Federal Law of April 30, 2010 № 68-FZ shows challenges in applying common principles and norms of international law.
References
Alekseevskaya E.I. (2010) Otsenka zakonnosti sudebnykh resheniy. Nauchno-prakticheskoe posobie [Assessing the Legality of Court Decisions. Manual]. Moscow: Yustitsinform, p. 17-18.
Alekseevskaya E.I. (2015) Novyi kodeks grazhdanskogo sudoproizvodstva: kakim emu byt'? [New Code of Civil Procedure: What it is to be Done?] Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki, no 2, p. 4-16.
Belyakova A.V. (2014) Prichiny dlitel'nogo sudoproizvodstva v arbitrazhnykh sudakh Rossiyskoy Federatsii [Reasons for Lengthy Trial in Russian Federation Arbitration Courts]. Vestnik arbitrazhnoy praktiki, no 3, p. 30-35.
Borisova E.A. (2012) Reformirovanie protsessual'nogo zakonodatel'stva: nastoyashchee i budushchee [Reform of Procedural Legislation: Present and Future]. Proceedings of International Research Conference Judicial Reform and Issues of Civil and Arbitrazh Legislations. Moscow: RAP, p. 11-18.
Dorovskikh L.I. (2014) Osobennosti ispolneniya sudebnykh resheniy o prisuzhdenii kompensatsii za narushenie prava na sudoproizvodstvo v razumnyy srok ili prava na ispolnenie sudebnogo akta v razumnyy srok [Special Features of Executing Court Decisions on Awarding Compensation for the Violation of Right to Court Action in Due Time or the Right to Execute a Court Act within Reasonable Time]. Ispolnitel'noe pravo, no 1, p. 8-11.
Gomien D., Harris D., Zvaak L. (1998) Evropeyskaya konventsiya o pravakh cheloveka i Evropeyskaya sotsial'naya khartiya: pravo i praktika [European Convention on Human Rights and European Social Charter: Law and Practice]. Moscow: MNIMP, p. 201-217.
(1994) Hrestomatiya po istorii filosofii [Reader on the History of Philosophy]. Ch. 1. Moscow: Prometey Publishing, p. 68.
Korshunov N.M. (ed.) (2005) Grazhdanskiy protsess: uchebnik [Civil Process. Textbook]. Moscow: Eksmo, p. 161.
Kulakova V.Yu. (2012) Svoevremennoe rassmotrenie grazhdanskikh del [Trying Civil Cases in Due Time]. Proceedings of International Research Conference Judicial Reform and Issues of Civil and Arbitrazh Legislations. Moscow: RAP, p. 331-339.
Morshchakova T.G. (ed.) (2012) Standarty spravedlivogo pravosudiya (mezhdunarodnye i natsional'nye praktiki) [Standards of Fair Trial]. Moscow: Mysl', p. 168.
Rekhtina I.V. Ispolnenie v Rossiyskoy Federatsii postanovleniy Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka: teoreticheskie i prakticheskie aspekty [Execution of the Decisions of the European Human Rights Court in Russia: Theory and Practice]. SPS Konsul'tantPlyus
Sirota E., Khoroshun Yu. (2012) Kompensatsiya za volokitu [Compensation for Red Tape]. EZh-Yurist, no 41, p. 5.
Shalamova A.N. (2013) Protivorechiya i zakonomernosti razvitiya pravovoy sistemy [Controversies and Consistencies in Legal System]. Gosudarstvennaya vlast' i mestnoe samoupravlenie, no 9, p. 6-7.
Solopova M.A. (2010) Evbulid. Novaya filosofskaya entsiklopediya. Moscow: Mysl',V.1, 2816 p. URL: https://shorturl.at/1Y7nS (accessed: December 1, 2014).
Vitkauskas D., Dikov G. (2014) Zashchita prava na spravedlivoe sudebnoe razbiratel'stvo v ramkakh Evropeyskoy konventsii o zashchite prav cheloveka. Seriya posobiy Soveta Evropy [Protecting Rights to a Fair Trial under the European Convention on Human Rights]. Voronezh: Elist, p. 135-140.
Vitryanskiy V.V., Sukhanov E.A. (eds.) (2010) Osnovnye problemy chastnogo prava. [The Major Issues of Private Law]. Moscow: Statut, 575 p.
Yakovlev V.F. (2012) Pravovoe gosudarstvo: voprosy formirovaniya [Legal State: Issues of Formation]. Moscow: Statut, 488 p.
Copyright (c) 2015 Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
