NGOs under European Convention on Human Rights / Tymofeyeva

did not mention that one would have sufficed. 1447 Nonetheless, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, it reduced the sum of compensation to 10,000 British pounds. 1448 The amount spent and claimed by the applicants must be reasonable as to quantum . If the Court finds it to be excessive, it will award a sum that, on its own estimate, is reasonable. In the case of Agrokompleks v. Ukraine , 1449 the applicant company claimed EUR 490,395.15 in respect of the costs incurred for legal services provided by its Ukrainian and French lawyers. The Court reiterated that in order for costs and expenses to be included in an award under Article 41 of the Convention, it must be established that they were actually and necessarily incurred and were reasonable as to quantum. It came to the conclusion that in the present case not all of the legal costs claimed were necessarily and reasonably incurred, given that there was some duplication in the work carried out by the foreign and the domestic lawyers. Making its own estimate on the basis of the information available, the Court awarded the applicant company EUR 30,000 in respect of costs and expenses. Under some circumstances, the Court may conclude that awarding a sum to compensate cost and expenses is redundant. Such was the situation in the case of Rodinná záložna, spořitelní a úvěrní družstvo and Others v. the Czech Republic , where it ruled as follows: “Regarding the costs and expenses before the Court, the Court considers that some of them are not linked to the violations found (costs of the expert reports), some are not corroborated or specified (costs for the separate account maintenance and costs for telephone, postage and other office costs save for CZK 369 for postage) and some were not necessarily incurred (travel expenses to Strasbourg and translation costs of the application into English because according to Rule 34 of the Rules of Court valid at that time applications could have been sent in an official language of a Contracting Party). Therefore these expenses cannot be reimbursed.” 1450 3.2.3.4 Default interest The criteria for calculating the default interest when just satisfaction is paid outside the time limit are stated in the judgments of the Court directly. Originally, the judgments did not contain any sanction mechanisms in cases of default interest on just satisfaction. 1451 Later, the Court based its determination of the default interest on the simple interest at an annual rate in force in the respondent state at the time of rendering of judgment. Given that interest rates in individual countries were, of course, different, the Court gradually unified its practice default interest in order not to discriminate among the applicants. The default interest to be paid in the event that the time-limit is exceeded. Presently, it is connected with the marginal lending rate of

1447 Ibid ., § 30. 1448 Ibid . 1449 Agrokompleks (just satisfaction) , cited above, § 96. 1450 Rodinná záložna, spořitelní a úvěrní družstvo (just satisfaction), cited above, § 25.

1451 AGOSI v. the United Kingdom , 24 October 1986, Series a no. 108; Tre Traktörer AB, cited above; British-American Tobacco Company Ltd , cited above, and Unión Alimentaria Sanders, cited above.

279