Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) of European Court of Human Rights, November 09, 2004 (case CASE OF SAEZ MAESO v. SPAIN)

President:Mr J.-P. Costa
Resolution Date:November 09, 2004



(Application no. 67647/01)



9 November 2004



This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Bakay and Others v. Ukraine,

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:

Mr J.-P. Costa, President,

Mr L. Loucaides,

Mr C. Bîrsan,

Mr K. Jungwiert,

Mr V. Butkevych,

Mrs W. Thomassen,

Mrs A. Mularoni, judges,

and Mr T.L. Early, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 19 October 2004,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:


  1. The case originated in an application (no. 67647/01) against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by six Ukrainian nationals ("the applicants"): Ms Olga Sergiyivna Bakay (the first applicant), Ms Svitlana Pavlivna Leschova (the second applicant), Ms Lyubov Mykolayivna Yemets (the third applicant), Ms Yaroslava Ivanivna Voloshyna (the fourth applicant), Ms Tamara Semenivna Semak (the fifth applicant) and Ms Nataliya Leonidivna Lytvynenko (the sixth applicant), on 4 January 2001.

  2. The Ukrainian Government ("the Government") were represented by their Agents, Ms Valeria Lutkovska, succeeded by Ms Zoryana Bortnovska.

  3. The applicants' complaints under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention were communicated on 9 May 2003. On the same date the Court decided that Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be applied and the admissibility and merits of the complaints be considered together.

  4. The applicants and the Government each filed observations on the admissibility and the merits (Rule 59 § 1).


  5. The first and fifth applicants were born in 1960. The second applicant was born in 1959. The third applicant was born in 1969. The fourth applicant was born in 1945. The sixth applicant was born in 1965. The applicants are nationals of Ukraine and reside in Beryslav, the Kherson Region.


  6. In April 1998 the applicants initiated proceedings in the Beryslav City Court (the "Beryslav Court") against the Department of Education of the Beryslav Municipal Council (the "Department"), seeking to recover an additional salary payment allegedly due to them for their time-in-service.

  7. On 13 May 1998 the Beryslav Court allowed the applicants' claims and ordered the Department to pay the applicants the additional salary (time-in-service bonuses). In particular, it ordered that the first applicant be paid UAH 570.85[1] in compensation, the second - UAH 367.52[2], the third - UAH 204.3[3], the fourth - UAH 863.4[4], the fifth - UAH 561.4[5], and the sixth applicant - UAH 292.3[6].

  8. On 18 May 1998 the Beryslav City Bailiffs' service (the "Bailiffs") initiated enforcement proceedings for the judgment of 13 May 1998.

  9. On 2 August 1999 the Beryslav Court suspended the execution of the judgment for three months due to the lack of funds in the budget of the Department.

  10. On 7 March 2001 the Bailiffs informed the applicants that the Beryslav Court had suspended the execution of the judgment of 13 May 1998. On 13 August 2002 the Bailiffs informed the applicants that the judgment of 13 May 1998 would be executed when the State had provided the necessary budgetary funding. The judgment remained unenforced due to the Department's lack of funds.

  11. On 31 July 2003 the amounts due to them pursuant to the judgment of 13 May 1998 were transferred to the applicants. They received the following amounts (the initial sums awarded by that judgment having been subjected to taxation): the first applicant - UAH 401.2[7], the second applicant - UAH 276.35[8], the third applicant - UAH 173.18[9], the...

To continue reading