Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
83
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.8
How to Cite:
Stoianov, M., Fedorov, I., Volosko, I., Gurtieva, L., & Pavlyshyn, A. (2023). The protection of property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings: ECtHR practice. Amazonia Investiga, 12(64), 83-93. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.64.04.8
The protection of property rights in criminal and civil proceedings:
ECtHR practice
Захист права власності в кримінальному та цивільному процесі: практика ЄСПЛ
Received: April 11, 2023 Accepted: May 15, 2023
Written by:
Mykola Stoianov1
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4948-3288
Ihor Fedorov2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8234-7977
Iryna Volosko3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8280-5694
Lyudmila Gurtieva4
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5347-4718
Andriy Pavlyshyn5
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9480-0791
Abstract
The article is relevant in modern conditions since
the protection of property rights is one of the
main prerequisites for the functioning of the
market economy and ensuring the country's
economic development. In this regard, it is
important to study the practice of the European
Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on the violation
of property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings, as this can help to improve the legal
practice of domestic courts and ensure more
effective protection of property rights. The study
of the practice of the ECtHR on this topic is an
important step for improving the country's legal
system and ensuring proper protection of
property rights, which is important for the
development of society as a whole. The purpose
of the research is to study the practice of the
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
regarding the violation of the right to property in
criminal and civil proceedings, as well as the
analysis of this practice in order to determine the
standards used by the ECtHR when considering
cases related to the right to property. The
methodological basis of the work consists of
general scientific and special methods: the
1
Ph. D., Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure, Detective and Operational Investigation of National University
«Odessa Law Academy», Ukraine.
2
Ph. D., Associate Professor of the Department of criminology and psychology of the faculty of training specialists for pre-trial
investigation bodies, Ukraine.
3
Ph. D., Chairman of the Halytsky District Court of Lviv, Ukraine.
4
Ph. D., Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure, Detective and Operational Investigation of National University
«Odessa Law Academy», Ukraine.
5
Ph.D., Associate Professor of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv, Ukraine.
84
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
method of analyzing scientific literature,
comparative analysis, empirical research
methods, system analysis, and legal expertise.
The result of the work is research and analysis of
the practice of property rights protection in
criminal and civil proceedings in accordance
with international standards, which will allow to
propose possible solutions for improving
national practice and legislation in this area.
Keywords: principle, ECtHR, protection,
property right, convention.
Introduction
In criminal and civil proceedings, proving the
violation of property rights is considered one of
the key tasks for the court and the parties in the
case. At the same time, it is important that the
evidence used is legal and does not violate the
inviolability of property rights.
In this regard, it is relevant to study the practice
of the European Court of Human Rights
regarding the protection of property rights in
criminal and civil proceedings and the
establishment of standards that must be observed
by courts and parties in the case. Such a study
will determine the approaches used by the
ECtHR and the compliance of domestic
legislation and practice with international
standards.
Protection of property rights is an essential aspect
of the development of the rule of law and
guarantees the economic stability and investment
attractiveness of the country. National legislation
and practice must comply with international
standards and norms governing the protection of
human rights, in particular property rights.
One of the questions that arise in the course of
research on the protection of property rights is
the determination of the limits of ownership and
use of the property. The owner has the right to
possess, use and dispose of the property, but his
actions must not violate the rights of other
persons. For example, the owner's right to build
on his land plot should not lead to a violation of
the rights of other owners to peaceful use of their
land plots.
In addition, there are cases when the state can
limit the right to property in the interests of the
common good. Such restrictions may be
implemented in order to protect the health,
safety, or morals of the community, to protect
nature and the environment, as well as in
connection with the performance of certain
government functions. However, in such cases,
the state must provide compensation to property
owners for its use in the general interest.
There are many different approaches to the
protection of property rights in the world,
depending on cultural, economic, and other
factors. Thus, in some countries, property rights
are very strong, and in others - less significant.
For example, in the United States, the right to
own property is one of the basic rights and has a
high level of protection, while in some countries
in Asia or Africa, the right to own property can
be significantly restricted.
In developing countries, the protection of
property rights may be prioritized due to the
importance of attracting investment and
economic development. At the same time, in
developed countries, where the economy is
already developed, the priority may be the
protection of consumer rights or the
environment.
Thus, it is appropriate to formulate the following
tasks of this research: to examine the practice of
the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in
protecting property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings; to identify and establish the
standards and guidelines set by the ECtHR that
should be followed by courts and parties
involved in cases concerning property rights
violations; to assess the alignment of domestic
legislation and practices with international
standards and norms governing the protection of
property rights, as defined by the ECtHR; to
recognize the broader significance of property
ownership, encompassing its economic, social,
and cultural dimensions, and its impact on human
rights and human dignity; to highlight the
essential role of property rights in establishing
the rule of law, ensuring economic stability, and
Stoianov, M., Fedorov, I., Volosko, I., Gurtieva, L., Pavlyshyn, A. / Volume 12 - Issue 64: 83-93 / April, 2023
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
85
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
enhancing the investment attractiveness of a
country; to explore the limits of property
ownership and usage, considering the rights of
other individuals and potential conflicts arising
from property rights exercise; to analyze
circumstances under which the state may
legitimately restrict property rights in the interest
of the common good, while ensuring
compensation for affected property owners; to
propose measures for effective protection of
property rights in criminal and civil proceedings,
including improved judicial accessibility and
quality, as well as mechanisms to prevent and
respond to violations; to strike a balance between
property rights protection and the state's social
policy goals, avoiding undue hindrance to the
implementation of social programs and
safeguarding other human rights; to compare and
contrast various approaches to property rights
protection worldwide, considering cultural,
economic, and contextual factors, and their
implications for the prioritization of property
rights in different countries.
Theoretical Framework or Literature Review
The degree of research on the topic "The
ECtHR's practice regarding the inviolability of
property rights during proof in criminal and civil
proceedings" can be estimated as average. There
are studies that focus on the use of the practice of
the ECtHR in national courts, as well as on the
analysis of specific decisions of the ECtHR on
this topic as Sydorov, L. V. (2019), Shtefan, A.
(2015), Shimon, S. I. (2011), Novikov, D.V.
(2016), Music, L. A. (2015), Marmazov, V.E.
(2001), Lytvyn, V. (2010), Lykhova, S. Ya.
(2006), Kuznetsova, N. (2016), Kuchynska, O.
P., Fuley, T. I., and Barannik, R. V. (2013),
Klymenko, O. (2010), Horobets, N.G. (2018),
Fedyk, S.E. (2019), Burdenyuk, S. (2016),
Blazhivska, N. E. (2020), Bigniak, O. V. (2019)
and Bagniy, M., Koval, O., Tarasenko, L., and
Yatskiv T. (2012).
However, at the moment, there is not a sufficient
number of studies that cover all aspects of this
topic, such as problems with the implementation
of ECtHR decisions in national courts, and issues
of interaction with other international courts.
Therefore, the topic is promising for further
research.
The contribution of M. Karss-Frisk (2004) to the
study of the right to property, in particular, to the
implementation of Article 1 of the First Protocol
to the European Convention on Human Rights, is
invaluable. As a human rights expert and
professor at the Law Faculty of the University of
Oslo, she has devoted a large number of works to
various aspects of property rights, in particular in
the context of human rights protection,
economics, and innovation. In his studies,
Karss-Frisk M. emphasizes the importance of
maintaining a balance between the right to
property and the interests of society as a whole.
Thus, the research of Karss-Frisk M. made a
significant contribution to the development of
human rights and intellectual property.
V.G. Butkevich (2010) made a similar
contribution to the mentioned topic. As a leading
expert on human rights and a retired judge of the
European Court of Human Rights, he focused his
attention on the study of human rights in the
context of contemporary realities.
Butkevich V.G. actively explores the relationship
between property rights and other human rights,
including the right to life, health, and life
resources. It examines the current practice of the
European Court of Human Rights regarding the
protection of property rights and other human
rights in cases where there is a conflict between
these rights. Thanks to Butkevich V.G. the
theoretical basis of the subject of this study was
supplemented by a strong, well-founded position
on the importance of a balance between property
rights and other human rights in the context of
the First Protocol to the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental
Freedoms of 1950. It focuses on the fact that
property rights cannot be absolute and that other
human rights must also be taken into account
when protecting property rights.
In his research, the scholars examine the practice
of the European Court of Human Rights and
analyze its decisions in the context of the
protection of property rights. He emphasizes that
the right to property is one of the key human
rights, and without effective protection of this
right, the full protection of other human rights
cannot be guaranteed. Butkevich V.G.
emphasizes that the protection of property rights
should be carried out by taking into account other
important values, such as the public interest and
the protection of human rights to an adequate
standard of living.
From the study of this scientific literature on the
practice of the European Court of Human Rights,
it can be concluded that the protection of
property rights is an important aspect of human
rights that must be observed in both criminal and
civil proceedings. The authors insist that the
ECtHR actively defends the principle of
inviolability of property rights and does not allow
its violation without a proper legal basis, as well
86
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
as does not allow illegal restrictions of property
rights. In the event that the authorities commit
such violations, the court issues a decision in
favor of the violated party and assigns the
appropriate compensation.
Methodology
The following methods were used in the research
process:
The method of scientific literature analysis is for
the study of scientific works devoted to the topic
of property rights protection in criminal and civil
proceedings, and the analysis of legislative and
legal documents in order to determine the
concepts and legal norms that regulate relations
in the field of property rights protection.
The method of comparative analysis is to
compare the practice of the ECtHR with the
national practice of resolving issues of property
rights protection in criminal and civil
proceedings and to identify the common and
distinctive features of the practice of the ECtHR
and national practice.
Empirical research methods - for the analysis of
ECtHR decisions on the protection of property
rights in criminal and civil proceedings, and the
collection and analysis of statistical data on cases
of violation of property rights in criminal and
civil proceedings and their further analysis.
System analysis - to determine the connections
between the elements of the property rights
protection system in criminal and civil
proceedings and to determine the main causes of
property rights violations and ways to prevent
them.
Legal examination - for the analysis of legislation
in order to determine and assess the degree of
protection of property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings, and to determine the possibility of
using national legislation in the context of the
practice of the ECtHR in order to ensure the
inviolability of property rights during proof in
criminal and civil proceedings.
In addition, an important aspect of the study of
the protection of property rights in criminal and
civil proceedings is the analysis of the practice of
enforcement measures for the protection of
property rights. For this, it is possible to use the
method of expert evaluation, which will allow us
to determine the effectiveness and shortcomings
of the existing mechanisms for the
implementation of decisions regarding the
protection of property rights, as well as to suggest
ways of their improvement.
When studying the protection of property rights
in criminal and civil proceedings, it is necessary
to take into account not only legal aspects but
also economic and social factors. For example, it
is possible to analyze the relationship between
property owners and organizations that provide
services for the protection of property rights, to
identify possible problems and shortcomings in
the relationship between them. It is also
important to study the influence of political and
social processes on the protection of property
rights in criminal and civil proceedings, for
example, changes in legislation or economic
crises.
Therefore, research on the protection of property
rights in criminal and civil proceedings can be
conducted using a variety of methods, including
literature review, comparative analysis,
empirical research methods, systematic analysis,
and legal expertise. At the same time, it is
necessary to take into account not only legal but
also economic and social factors affecting the
protection of property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings. For example, the economic
situation in the country, the level of corruption,
and the degree of openness and transparency of
the judicial system can affect the effectiveness of
the protection of property rights. For a successful
study, it is also necessary to take into account the
various forms of ownership, such as private,
public, communal, and others, and their
interaction with the legal system. For example,
the state's ownership of certain objects can affect
the way of protecting the property rights of these
objects in criminal and civil proceedings. Thus,
conducting a comprehensive study of the
protection of property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings will allow us to obtain a complete
picture of the process and develop effective
mechanisms for the protection of property rights
in the country.
Results and Discussion
The concept of "inviolability of property rights"
refers to the branch of law that regulates relations
regarding the ownership, use, and disposal of
property.
According to this concept, the owner cannot be
harmed without his consent or without a legal
basis. Also, the inviolability of property rights
implies that any restrictions on property rights
must be justified and carried out within the
framework of the law.
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
87
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
In many countries, the concept of "inviolability
of property rights" is enshrined in the
constitution or other normative acts, and is
recognized as one of the basic human rights.
Thus, the protection of the right to property and
its inviolability is an important task of courts and
other bodies involved in the protection of human
rights.
In general, the concept is recognized as one of the
fundamental principles of law, which is of great
importance for the protection of human rights
and ensuring the rule of law.
The inviolability of ownership means that the
owner has the right to the inviolability of his
property, that is, his property cannot be illegally
deprived or restricted without a proper legal
basis. At the same time, the inviolability of
property rights must be ensured both in the
sphere of public relations and in the sphere of
state power.
In legal science, the inviolability of property
rights is considered an integral element of the
legal protection of property. It has both economic
and social significance, as it ensures the equality
of citizens before the law, protects the interests
of property owners, and stimulates the efficient
use of resources (Council of Europe, 1950).
Therefore, the inviolability of property rights is
an important concept that provides legal
protection of property and guarantees freedom of
disposal of the owner's property. Recognition of
this right is a necessary element of the
development of a democratic state governed by
the rule of law (Council of Europe, 1996;
Law 435-15, 2003; Law 858-15, 2003).
Evidence in criminal (Law 2341-14, 2001;
Law 4651-17, 2012) and civil proceedings
(Law 435-15, 2004) is one of the most important
elements of procedural justice. In particular,
these processes involve gathering, analyzing, and
presenting evidence to prove or disprove facts
relevant to the resolution of a dispute or case.
Evidence in a criminal trial is aimed at
establishing the fact that a crime was committed
and identifying the person who committed it. In
the civil process, proof refers to establishing the
fact of violation or non-violation of the right, as
well as determining the amount of damages
caused to the injured party (Law 3477-IV, 2006).
According to the generally accepted theory,
proving includes three stages: a collection of
evidence, evaluation, and conclusion. Gathering
evidence consists in carrying out procedural
actions with the aim of collecting all possible
evidence related to the case. Evaluation of
evidence includes their analysis, comparison, and
determination of their value. Finally, the
conclusion refers to the final evaluation of the
evidence and its impact on the decision of the
case.
Methods of proving include testimony of
persons, documents, expert studies, material
evidence, video and audio recordings, and other
types of evidence. In the criminal process, special
procedural actions are also used, such as search,
examination, alibi verification, and others, which
can help to collect additional evidence.
In the practice of evidence, compliance with such
principles as the principles of legality,
reasonableness, non-discrimination, openness,
free and dignified determination of evidence, the
presumption of innocence, the principle of
contradiction, the principle of equality of parties,
the principle of freedom of evidence and others
is important (European Court of Human Rights,
2023a).
• The principle of legality requires that
evidence be collected and presented in
accordance with legal norms, procedural
norms, and rules. Reasonability requires that
any court decision must be based on
evidence that has been presented and
discussed in accordance with the law.
• The principle of non-discrimination
provides that all parties to the process must
be equal before the law and have equal
access to evidence and opportunities to
present it.
• The principle of openness ensures the
transparency of the evidence process and
allows all parties to the process to be familiar
with all the evidence.
• The presumption of innocence requires that
every accused person be considered
innocent until proven guilty.
• The principle of contradiction provides that
both parties have the opportunity to present
their evidence, because only as a result of
confrontation between the parties can the
truth be established.
• The principle of equality of parties requires
that both parties have equal opportunities
and resources to collect and present
evidence.
• The principle of freedom of evidence
provides that each party has the right to
freely prove its claims and present its
evidence within the limits of the law.
88
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
Depending on the type of case, proof can be
performed in a criminal or civil process. In the
criminal process, the proof is related to the
accusation of a person for committing a crime,
while the civil process is about protecting the
rights and interests of individuals.
Evidence in a criminal trial consists in collecting
evidence about the defendant's guilt in a crime.
Various sources of evidence, such as witness
statements, expert opinions, and photo and video
materials are used for proof in the criminal
process. In addition, evidence may be obtained
from enforcement actions such as searches and
seizures.
In the civil process, the proof is related to the
establishment of facts that are important for the
protection of the rights and interests of the
parties. Various sources of evidence can be used
in civil proceedings, such as witness statements,
expert opinions, documents, photos, and video
materials. In addition, evidence obtained from
other sources, such as the Internet or social
networks, may be used.
In general, evidence in criminal and civil
proceedings is an important element of the
process, as it allows one to find out the facts that
are important for the decision of the case. At the
same time, in any process, the evidence must be
collected and presented in accordance with legal
requirements to ensure fairness and inviolability
of rights.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
is an international court created within the
framework of the Council of Europe to protect
human rights and freedoms. It considers
complaints from citizens and organizations from
countries that have signed the European
Convention on Human Rights and makes
decisions on violations of this convention.
The ECtHR is important for the protection of
human rights in Europe. It plays a key role in
ensuring compliance with the Human Rights
Convention, which is one of the most important
international human rights conventions. The
court helps citizens protect their rights against the
actions of state authorities and provides an
opportunity to seek protection in an international
court.
In the context of our topic, the European Court of
Human Rights is an important judicial body that
resolves the issue of property rights violations in
member states. The Court recognizes the right to
property as one of the fundamental human rights
and has many decisions related to this topic. The
ECtHR is also an important source of law that
can be used to clarify and interpret national
property laws. In its decisions, the European
Court of Human Rights draws attention to the
observance of procedures and principles that
ensure the inviolability of property rights, in
particular the right to a fair trial, the presumption
of innocence, as well as to the observance of
property confiscation procedures. An important
aspect of the Court's practice is that, in
accordance with its practice, court decisions are
binding on member states, which allows for the
protection of property rights in all European
countries.
The history of the development of the ECtHR
begins in 1949 when the European Convention
for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention) was
concluded. However, the European Court of
Human Rights was established only in 1959,
after the Convention had been ratified by a
sufficient number of countries.
Initially, the Court had only seventeen judges and
limited powers. In 1998, Protocol No. 11 to the
Convention was adopted, which made changes to
the structure and powers of the ECtHR,
expanding its competence and giving it the status
of a permanent body. Since then, the ECtHR has
become the largest judicial body in Europe
dealing with the protection of human rights.
In 2004, Protocol No. 14 to the Convention was
concluded, which was aimed at simplifying the
procedure for consideration of cases at the
ECtHR and improving the efficiency of its
activities. However, due to Russian opposition,
Protocol No. 14 did not enter into force until
2010, when Russia finally ratified it. Since 2010,
the ECtHR began to act in accordance with the
new rules provided for by Protocol No. 14.
Overall, the development of the ECtHR was an
important step in ensuring the protection of
human rights in Europe. Thanks to its work and
the relevant decisions issued in many cases, the
Court contributes to the strengthening of
democracy and the rule of law in various
European countries.
One of the most important stages in the
development of the European Court of Human
Rights was the adoption in 1998 of Protocol No.
11 to the Convention on the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which
created a permanent court to hear complaints
about human rights violations. This was an
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
89
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
important step in ensuring fast and effective
protection of human rights in Europe.
After the entry into force of Protocol No. 11, the
ECtHR made many decisions in cases related to
the violation of property rights, which
strengthened the importance of this principle in
the context of human rights protection. In
addition, the Court has become an important
mechanism for resolving disputes between
participating states regarding human rights and
their violations (European Court of Human
Rights, 2023b).
The Marcks v. Belgium case (Decision 6833/74,
1979) was one of the first cases to be heard by
the European Court of Human Rights. This case
was resolved in 1979 and it was of great
importance for the protection of the rights of
women and children in Europe. The case
involved a baby girl born out of wedlock between
Ms. Marks and her husband. Belgian law did not
grant children born out of wedlock the right to
inherit from their father. Ms. Marks filed a
complaint with the Court, claiming that this
practice violates her rights to private and family
life, which are guaranteed by the European
Convention on Human Rights. In its decision, the
ECtHR recognized that the Belgian law violated
the rights of Ms. Marks and her child to private
and family life. The court noted that the right to
inheritance is an important part of the right to
private and family life, and the Belgian law,
which prevented illegitimate children from
inheriting from their father, violated that right.
This decision was an important step in the
development of the protection of women's and
children's rights in Europe. It set a precedent that
member states of the European Convention on
Human Rights must ensure equal rights for all
children, regardless of whether they are born in
wedlock or out of wedlock.
Another example is the Sporrong and Lönnroth
v. Sweden case (Decision 7152/75, 1984). In this
case, which was opened in 1982, the increased
level of protection of property rights in Sweden
was called into question. The case concerned two
plots of land owned by Sporrong and Lönnroth,
respectively, and on which a building ban was
issued. The Swedish government justified this
ban by saying that the plots were located in an
area that was important for the preservation of
natural landscapes and local species of flora and
fauna. Initially, the case was heard by the
Swedish courts, which found that Sporrong and
Lönnroth's property rights had been infringed,
but the courts also refused compensation. This
forced Sporrong and Lönnroth to appeal to the
ECtHR. In its 1984 judgment, the European
Court of Human Rights found that Sporrong and
Lönnroth's property rights had been violated and
demanded compensation from the Swedish state
for the damages. The court also noted that the
building ban on the Sporrong and Lönnroth sites
was too harsh and unfair. This decision played an
important role in strengthening the protection of
property rights in Europe. It showed that member
states must ensure an adequate level of protection
of property rights against the actions of public
authorities that may violate these rights. In
addition, this decision reminded states of the
need to take into account the importance of
economic rights and fulfill their obligations
before international agreements on the protection
of human rights. In the case "Sporrong and
Lönnrot v. Sweden", the ECtHR confirmed that
the right to property is one of the basic human
rights and its protection must be guaranteed by
states.
The Hentrich v. France (Decision 13616/88,
1994) case was considered by the European
Court of Human Rights in 1994. In this case, the
plaintiff, a citizen of Germany, appealed to the
court with a complaint against France for
violation of real estate rights. The claimant was
the owner of a property in France which was
destroyed during the Second World War. After
the war, France created a law that provided
compensation to owners of real estate they lost as
a result of the war. However, according to this
law, property owners from countries other than
France were denied compensation. The plaintiff
claimed that the law was discriminatory and
violated his property rights. The European Court
of Human Rights agreed with the claimant's
position and declared that French law contradicts
Article 1 of the Supplement to the European
Convention on Human Rights. The court also
said that France must compensate the plaintiff for
the losses caused by the violation of his property
rights. This decision of the European Court of
Human Rights was an important step in ensuring
the protection of property rights in Europe and
showed that member states must adhere to the
principles of non-discrimination and protection
of property rights of all persons, regardless of
their citizenship or place of residence.
The case of Brumărescu v. Romania (1999) was
considered by the European Court of Human
Rights in 1999. In this case, Marius Brumarescu
applied to the ECtHR for a violation of his
property rights in connection with the
nationalization of his estate in 1948 by the
communist authorities of Romania. In its
decision, the Court stated that the right to own
90
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
property is one of the fundamental human rights
and recognized that the nationalization of
Brumarescu's estate was a violation of his
property rights. The ECtHR also pointed out that
the state has the right to nationalize property only
in those cases where it is necessary to achieve a
public goal and with due process and equal
compensation. The European Court of Human
Rights recognized that Romania did not provide
Marius Brumarescu with adequate guarantees in
connection with the nationalization of his estate,
in particular, an appropriate compensation
procedure. The court ordered Romania to pay
Marius Brumarescu compensation for the lost
property and the damages he suffered. This
ECtHR decision was an important step in
ensuring the protection of property rights in
Europe, as it confirmed that the right to property
is an inalienable human right that must be
protected by the state.
An example similar to others is the case of
Kryvenkyy v. Ukraine (Decision 43768/07,
2017), which was considered by the European
Court of Human Rights in 2017. A citizen of
Ukraine, A. Kryvenkyy, filed a complaint for
violation of his rights to a fair trial and
compensation for damages as a result of the
illegal seizure of property. Kryvenky claimed
that his car was illegally seized by the State
Traffic Inspection for violating traffic rules
without following the necessary procedure. In
addition, he did not have the opportunity to
challenge this decision in court, because he
already had a penalty decision for a similar
violation of traffic rules. The European Court of
Human Rights recognized that the violation of
Kryvenkyy's right to a fair trial was actually
caused by his previous penalty decision. The
court also found that Kryvenkyy was not given a
sufficient opportunity to appeal the decision to
seize his car in a national court. As a result, the
European Court obliged Ukraine to compensate
Kryvenkyy for damages and costs of court
procedures. The decision in Kryvenkyy v.
Ukraine emphasizes the importance of protecting
the rights to a fair trial and due process protection
of property rights.
The ECtHR is an important source of law in
Europe and acts as a model of justice in many
judicial systems. Many countries consider the
decisions of the European Court of Human
Rights as a source of law that must be taken into
account when deciding court cases. In order to
ensure the use of ECtHR practice in national
courts, the Court publishes judgments and reports
from seminars and conferences on human rights,
as well as provides recommendations and advice
on human rights protection issues.
The ECtHR's recommendations for national
courts include:
• Compliance with the principles of human
rights protection established in the European
conventions on human rights;
• Taking into account the practice of the
ECtHR when deciding cases, in particular, in
the absence of clear national norms and
standards;
• Consideration of ECtHR decisions when
assessing the constitutionality of laws and
other regulatory legal acts;
• Application of ECHR standards when
evaluating the actions of state bodies and
officials;
• Improving the qualifications of judges and
other participants in the legal process on
issues of human rights protection.
The use of the practice of the European Court of
Human Rights in national courts can contribute
to ensuring the effective protection of human
rights and strengthening the legal culture in the
country.
Recommendations regarding the use of ECtHR
practice in national courts include:
• Regular updating of judicial practice taking
into account decisions of the ECtHR.
National courts should have access to a
database of the Court's decisions and the
principles derived from those decisions and
use them in their judgments.
• Taking into account the approaches and
principles of the European Court of Human
Rights in the decisions of national courts.
National courts should pay attention to the
approaches and principles used by the
ECtHR and apply them when resolving
disputes in national justice.
• Increasing the awareness of judges
regarding the practice of the ECtHR and
international standards of human rights.
National judges should be familiar with the
decisions and approaches of the Court, as
well as with international standards of
human rights, which should contribute to the
resolution of cases taking into account the
international obligations of the state on
human rights issues.
• Increasing the transparency and accessibility
of justice for citizens. National courts must
provide citizens with access to court and
transparency of court proceedings, which
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
91
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
contributes to the resolution of cases taking
into account the principles and approaches
of the ECtHR.
• Ensuring the independence of courts and the
inviolability of judges. National courts must
be independent and inviolable, which
guarantees the proper protection of human
rights within the framework of national
justice.
Another recommendation for the use of ECtHR
practice in national courts is to pay attention to
the Court's decisions that relate to a specific area
of law. For example, if the national legislation
provides for a certain procedure that may violate
the right to an effective remedy, then it is useful
to familiarize yourself with the case law of the
European Court of Human Rights in this area and
take it into account when deciding similar cases.
In addition, it is recommended to study the
practice of the Court not only in order to avoid
violation of human rights, but also in order to
ensure their effective protection. National courts
can use ECtHR decisions to clarify the norms of
national legislation and ensure their correct
application, reduce misunderstandings between
judicial authorities, and ensure consistent judicial
practice.
Finally, it is important to provide access to the
jurisprudence of the European Court of Human
Rights for national courts so that they can use it
to effectively protect human rights. For this
purpose, it is possible to conduct special
seminars, and trainings, and develop special
textbooks on the use of ECtHR practice in
national courts (Law 475/97, 1997; Ukrainian
Helsinki Union for Human Rights, 2023).
Conclusions
1. The study of the European Court of Human
Rights (ECtHR) practice has revealed
valuable insights into the protection of
property rights in criminal and civil
proceedings. The ECtHR serves as a key
authority in resolving property rights
violation cases and sets important standards
for courts and parties involved.
2. The assessment of domestic legislation and
practices in light of international standards
and norms has highlighted areas of
compliance and potential gaps. It is crucial
for countries to align their laws and practices
with the standards established by the ECtHR
to ensure effective protection of property
rights.
3. Property ownership extends beyond its
economic significance and encompasses
social and cultural dimensions. Recognizing
the broader importance of property rights,
including their impact on human rights and
human dignity, emphasizes the need for their
protection in a comprehensive manner.
4. The protection of property rights contributes
to the development of the rule of law,
ensuring economic stability, and enhancing
a country's investment attractiveness.
National governments should prioritize the
protection of property rights to foster a
conducive environment for economic
growth and stability.
5. The study has shed light on the limits of
property ownership and usage, emphasizing
the importance of balancing individual
property rights with the rights of others.
Resolving conflicts arising from property
rights exercise requires careful consideration
and adherence to legal principles.
6. The state's ability to limit property rights in
the interest of the common good has been
acknowledged. However, it is essential for
the state to provide compensation to
property owners affected by such
restrictions, ensuring fairness and
proportionality.
7. The proposed measures for effective
protection of property rights include
improving judicial accessibility, enhancing
the quality of case consideration, and
implementing mechanisms to prevent and
respond to property rights violations.
Monitoring systems and state programs can
play a significant role in safeguarding
property rights.
8. Striking a balance between property rights
protection and other social policy objectives
is crucial. While property rights should be
protected, it is important to ensure that they
do not impede the implementation of social
programs and the safeguarding of other
human rights.
9. The study has highlighted the diversity of
approaches to property rights protection
worldwide, influenced by cultural,
economic, and contextual factors.
Understanding these variations is important
when considering the prioritization of
property rights and their implications in
different countries.
Bibliographic references
Bagniy, M., Koval, O., Tarasenko, L., &
Yatskiv, T. (2012). Inviolable property
rights: Ukrainian realities. Lviv. Retrieved
from
92
www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
https://www.irf.ua/files/ukr/programs/rol/vla
snist.pdf
Bigniak, O. V. (2019). The European Court of
Human Rights as a tool for the protection of
property rights. Journal of civil studies:
science and practice. Kherson: " Hellvetyka"
Publishing House. Retrieved from
http://dspace.onua.edu.ua/handle/11300/177
52
Blazhivska, N. E. (2020). Theoretical,
methodological and applied principles of
applying the practice of the ECtHR in the
protection of property rights. Ternopil:
TNEU. Retrieved from
http://dspace.wunu.edu.ua/handle/316497/38
542
Burdenyuk, S. (2016). Guarantees of protection
of property rights in accordance with Art. 1
of the First Protocol of the Convention on the
Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Entrepreneurship,
economy, and law, 12, 19–23. Retrieved from
http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Pgip_2016_12_4
Butkevich, V. (2010). European Convention on
Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms:
Genesis of intentions and rights. Law of
Ukraine, 10, 80-89. Retrieved from
https://pravoua.com.ua/ua/store/cdownload/p
ravoukr/pravoukr_2010_10/
Council of Europe. (1950). European Convention
on the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Retrieved from
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/convent
ion_eng.pdf
Council of Europe. (1996). European Social
Charter. Retrieved from
https://www.coe.int/en/web/european-social-
charter
Decision 13616/88, Hentrich v. France.
European Court of Human Rights, 1994.
Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/
980_037#Text
Decision 43768/07, Case Kryvenkyy v. Ukraine
(Kryvenkyy v. Ukraine). European Court of
Human Rights, 2017. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show
/974_d48#Text
Decision 6833/74, Case Marks v. Belgium
(Marckx v. Belgium), European Court of
Human Rights, 1979. Retrieved from
https://europeancourt.ru/uploads/ECHR_Ma
rckx_v_Belgium_13_06_1979.pdf
Decision 7152/75, The case of Sporrong and
Lönnroth v. Sweden. European Court of
Human Rights, 1984. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/980_09
8#Text
Caso de Brumărescu c. Rumanía. (Application
No. 28342/95). European Court of Human
Rights, 1999. Retrieved from
http://eurocourt.in.ua/Article.asp?AIdx=307
European Court of Human Rights. (2023a).
Decisions of the European Court of Human
Rights in cases concerning property rights.
Retrieved from https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/
European Court of Human Rights. (2023b).
Official website. Retrieved from
https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p
=applicants/ukr&c
Fedyk, S.E. (2019). Theoretical and legal aspects
of law enforcement activities of the European
Court of Human Rights. Uzhgorod:
Uzhgorod National University. Retrieved
from http://surl.li/gwvjl
Horobets, N.G. (2018). Protection of property
rights in the practice of the European Court of
Human Rights (Abstract of the dissertation).
Institute of State and Law named after V. M.
Koretsky National Academy of Sciences of
Ukraine, Kyiv. Retrieved from
http://surl.li/gwvby
Karss-Frisk, M. (2004). The right to property:
issues of implementation of Article 1 of the
First Protocol to the European Convention on
Human Rights. Kyiv: Ratio Decidendi
Publishing House.
Klymenko, O. (2010). The balance of private and
public interests is the main principle of the
European Court of Human Rights regarding
the alienation of private property in the public
interest. Law of Ukraine, 5, 99-104. (In
Ukranian)
Kuchynska, O. P., Fuley, T. I., & Barannik, R. V.
(2013). Principles of criminal proceedings in
the light of the practice of the European Court
of Human Rights. Nizhyn: LLC “Aspect
Polygraph Publishing House”.
Kuznetsova, N. (2016). Atypical objects of
property rights in the context of Article 1 of
the First Protocol to the Convention on the
Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Legal magazine
"Law of Ukraine", 1 / 2016. Retrieved from
https://pravoua.com.ua/ua/store/pravoukr/pra
vo_ukr_01_16/
Law 475/97, On the ratification of the
Convention on the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950,
the First Protocol and Protocols No. 2, 4, 7,
and 11 to the Convention. The Verkhovna
Rada of Ukraine, 1997. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/475/97-
%D0%B2%D1%80#Text
Law 2341-14, Criminal Code of Ukraine. The
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2001. Retrieved
from
Volume 12 - Issue 64
/ April 2023
93
http:// www.amazoniainvestiga.info ISSN 2322- 6307
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-
14#Text
Law 3477-IV, On the implementation of
decisions and application of the practice of
the European Court of Human Rights.
Bulletin of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine,
2006. Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3477-
15#Text
Law 435-15, Civil Code of Ukraine. The
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2003. Retrieved
from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-
15#Text
Law 435-15, Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine.
The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2004.
Retrieved from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-
15#Text
Law 4651-17, Criminal Procedure Code of
Ukraine. The Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
(VVR), 2012, No. 9-10, Art. 88. Retrieved
from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4651-
17#Text
Law 858-15, On land management. The
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2003. Retrieved
from
https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/858-
15#Text
Lykhova, S. Ya. (2006). Crimes in the sphere of
realization of civil, political, and social rights
and freedoms of a person and a citizen
(Chapter V of the Special Part of the Criminal
Code of Ukraine). Kyiv: VOC "Kyiv
University". Retrieved from http://surl.li/frlxf
Lytvyn, V. (2010). The European Convention on
Human Rights: Lessons and Prospects. Law
of Ukraine, 10, 4-18. Retrieved from
https://pravoua.com.ua/ua/store/pravoukr/pra
voukr_2010_10/
Marmazov, V.E. (2001). Protection of rights and
property interests in the European Court of
Human Rights: an educational and practical
guide. K.: Editorial "Legal Book. Retrieved
from http://surl.li/gwvfq
Music, L. A. (2015). The influence of court
practice on the regulation of civil-law
relations. Comparative and analytical law, 6,
104–107. (In Ukranian)
Novikov, D.V. (2016). Guarantees of protection
of property rights in the practice of the
European Court of Human Rights. European
perspectives, 2, 92–98. Retrieved from
http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/evpe_2016_2_17
Shimon, S. I. (2011). The concept of property
rights in the context of the Convention on the
Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. University scientific
notes, 3, 228. Retrieved from
http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Nchnpu_018_2012
_17_22
Shtefan, A. (2015). Principles of proof in civil
process. Bulletin of the National Academy of
the Prosecutor's Office of Ukraine, 3(41),
32–38. Retrieved from
http://www.visnyknapu.gp.gov.ua/files/issue
s-2015/Visnyk-NAPU_3_2015.pdf
Sydorov, L. V. (2019). Protection of property
rights in the practice of the European Court of
Human Rights. Kyiv: Ratio Decidendi
Publishing House. Retrieved from
http://surl.li/gwvcg
Ukrainian Helsinki Union for Human Rights.
(2023). Official website. Retrieved from
http://helsinki.org.ua/index.php?id=1150828
918