CYIL 2015

260

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,

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

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).

The case of

Oferta Plus S.R.L. v. Moldova

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

Comingersoll S.A. v. Portugal

[GC], no. 35382/97, § 35, ECHR 2000-IV.

Uniya OOO and Belcourt Trading Company v. Russia

, nos. 4437/03 and 13290/03, 19 June 2014.

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.

Oferta Plus S.R.L. v. Moldova

(just satisfaction), no. 14385/04, 12 February 2008.