CASE OF VOROBYEVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6-1 - Access to court)
Dmitry Dedov;Luis López Guerra
5. The applicants lived in a dormitory in Lipetsk, Russia. The dormitory was mainly inhabited by the students and the staff of the Lipetsk Metallurgy College (“the College”). 6. In 2000 the joint-stock company “NLMK” (“the Company”) registered its title over that dormitory as a result of privatisation. 7. The applicants brought a case against the Company seeking to obtain a title to the rooms they lived in. They argued in particular that the privatisation of the dormitory had taken place in violation of the legislation and that the Company could not be declared as a sole owner of the property. The Lipetsk Metallurgy College was also involved into the case as a third party. 8. On 19 April 2010 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Lipetsk found for the applicants and granted their claims. The District Court found that the dormitory was transferred to the Company in breach of domestic law. 9. On 2 June 2010 the appeal court upheld the judgment and it became final. 10. In August 2010 the applicants registered their title to the dormitory rooms and subsequently sold them to third parties. 11. On 12 April 2011 the Company lodged a request with the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Lipetsk seeking to reopen the proceedings on the grounds of newly discovered circumstances. It relied on the order of the College’s director and a lease agreement concluded in 2008 between the Company and the College in respect of the dormitory. The Company further argued that it had not been aware of those documents since they were possessed by the College. 12. On 12 May 2011 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Lipetsk quashed the judgment of 19 April 2010. The court found in particular that the documents presented by the Company might have had significant impact on the outcome of the case and thus they constituted “newly discovered circumstances”. 13. On 31 August 2011 as a result of the fresh consideration of the case the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Lipetsk rejected the applicants’ claims and ordered reversal of execution of the judgment of 19 April 2010. This judgment was upheld on 26 October 2011 by the Lipetsk Regional Court.