NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

of the Convention. It ruled that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in respect of the domestic authorities’ refusal to refund the election deposit to the applicant party. An application serving as the basis for the case of Industrial Financial Consortium Investment Metallurgical Union v. Ukraine 1185 was communicated in December 2008, but there has not yet been any decision on the subject. Nevertheless, it raises certain points under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, concerning a violation of the principle of legal certainty 1186 on the grounds that the same matter involving the same parties has been dealt with by the courts of general jurisdiction and the commercial courts in the course of two ‘parallel’ judicial procedures. 2.11.5 Other issues under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 Although in the majority of judgments in which the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention were the result of one of the reasons discussed above, there are still some cases that are not connected to finding breaches under Article 6 of the Convention. In the end of the case of Kirovogradoblenergo, PAT v. Ukraine , 1187 the Court dealt with a pure violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. The applicant company, Kirovogradoblenergo, PAT, was a Ukrainian joint stock private company managing electricity supply. The company complained that, according to domestic law, judges are only required to pay 50% of their electricity bills and that Ukraine refused to reimburse the company the remaining 50%. 1188 Though the company mentioned Article 6 in its application, the Court ruled that it is master of the characterisation to be given in law to the facts of the case. Therefore, it found that the above complaints fell solely under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The applicant company’s property rights were infringed by the fact that the state failed to reimburse the amount of debt for electricity. In accordance with Section 44 of the Status of Judges Act, judges were entitled to a 50% reduction in electricity payments. However, the law did not envisage any provision for reimbursement. The applicant company was in a situation whereby it was obliged to provide part of its services for free. The Court considered that that situation – where the applicant company was not able to pursue half of the debt owed to it because of the absence of a clear and foreseeable law on the matter – amounts to an interference with the applicant company’s right to peaceful enjoyment of its possessions which had no basis in law. This absence of clear and foreseeable law on the matter led the Court to conclude that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in the present case. In a number of cases, the Court had to evaluate the situation with property rights in Northern Cyprus. The applicants contended that the continuous denial of access to his property in this area, namely that Turkey had prevented its managers and 1185 Industrial Financial Consortium Investment Metallurgical Union v. Ukraine , no. 10640/05. 1186 All Roads Lead To…The European Court. Legal Journal № 1, January 2012. URL: accessed 20 July 2015. 1187 Kirovogradoblenergo, PAT, cited above, § 19. 1188 Sparks fly in the Ukraine. 4 July 2013. URL: accessed 20 July 2015.

225