CYIL 2015

ALLA TYMOFEYEVA CYIL 6 ȍ2015Ȏ has been quite problematic. Until 2000 it was unclear whether a legal entity may have moral suffering. That year, the Court, in the case of Comingersoll S. A. v. Portugal, 35 explained that a legal entity may suffer non-material damage in a result of affliction of the company’s reputation and suffering of the members of the management team, and, accordingly, deserves financial compensation. As to the amounts of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court to a legal person, the highest of them will be discussed in the next section. 2. Ten leaders This current section will deal with those cases concerning legal persons when they were awarded a sum of just satisfaction which exceeds a million euros. The author will name the top ten cases in this respect. The case of Uniya OOO and Belcourt Trading Company v. Russia 36 holds tenth place in the list of leaders. The applicants in this case are two companies: 1) Uniya OOO, a limited liability company registered in Bashkortostan and 2) Belcourt Trading Company, which was originally registered in Ireland, then in the USA, and subsequently in Belize. The case concerned the seizure and destruction of two consignments of alcohol, comprising over one million bottles of vodka. The Court found a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention (hereinafter ‘A 1 P-1’), in respect of Belcourt Trading Company (the first applicant company ceased to exist on the day the judgment was issued) on account of the destruction of the second consignment of alcohol. It was also held that there had been an infringement of Article 6 § 1 due to procedural barriers depriving the applicant companies of an effective ‘right to court’. Just satisfaction was awarded to the second applicant company in the amount as follows: USD 3,050,000 (pecuniary damage) and USD 23,200 (costs and expenses). 37 The case of Oferta Plus S.R.L. v. Moldova 38 is on the ninth position. The case related to a violation of the applicant company’s right to a fair hearing and to the peaceful enjoyment of its possessions due to the three-year failure to enforce a final judgment given in its favour. Moreover, the domestic courts unjustifiably extended the time limit for lodging an appeal by the opposite party. The Court ruled on the breaches of Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. It obliged the respondent state to pay the applicant company more than two million five hundred thousand euros .

35 Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal [GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV. 36 Uniya OOO and Belcourt Trading Company v. Russia , nos. 4437/03 and 13290/03, 19 June 2014. 37 Approximately EUR 2,267,100. As nowadays the sum of just satisfaction is awarded by the Court in euros, we are going to convert all the awards in other currencies into euros. 38 Oferta Plus S.R.L. v. Moldova (just satisfaction), no. 14385/04, 12 February 2008.

260