B.      Costs and expenses

344.  The applicant requested reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred in the sum of around 485,480 Russian roubles (RUB) (approximately EUR 11,240), including travel, photocopying, translation and services of a notary. The sum also included the sum of RUB 233,600 in respect of the sale of his home in Russia, which he claimed was necessary in order to obtain necessary funds; funeral costs in the sum of about RUB 46,310; and RUB 26,661 spent on attending a conference on trafficking in Cyprus in 2008. Relevant receipts were provided.

345.  The Cypriot Government argued that the applicant could only claim for costs which were necessarily incurred to prevent or redress a breach of the Convention, reasonable as to quantum and causally linked to the violation in question. As such, they contested the applicant’s claim of RUB 233,600 in respect of the sale of his flat, the sums expended on attending the 2008 conference and any costs and expenses not substantiated by receipts or not reasonable as to quantum.

346.  The Russian Government contended that the applicant had failed to substantiate his allegation that he was required to sell his flat and travel to Cyprus. In particular, they submitted that the applicant could have applied to relevant law enforcement authorities in Russia to request necessary documents and evidence from the Cypriot authorities and could have instructed a lawyer in Cyprus. The Russian Government also contested the applicant’s claim for the costs of the 2008 conference on the ground that it was not directly linked to the investigation of Ms Rantseva’s death.

347.  The Court recalls that the applicant is entitled to the reimbursement of costs and expenses in so far as it has been shown that these have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum. In the present case, the applicant is not entitled to claim the proceeds of the sale of his house or for the expenses of travelling to the conference in Cyprus in 2008, such conference not being directly linked to the investigation of Ms Rantseva’s death. Further, the Court recalls that it found only a procedural breach of Article 2. Accordingly, the applicant is not entitled to reimbursement of funeral expenses.

348.  Having regard to the above, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum of EUR 4,000 in respect of costs and expenses plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant on that amount, less EUR 850 received by way of legal aid from the Council of Europe. In the circumstances of this case the Court considers it appropriate that the costs and expenses are awarded against Cyprus.

C.  Default interest

349.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT UNANIMOUSLY

1. Rejects the Cypriot Government’s request to strike the application out of the list;

2. Decides to join to the merits the Russian Government’s objection ratione materiae as to Article 4 of the Convention, and rejects it;

3. Declares the complaints under Articles 2, 3, 4 and 5 admissible and the remainder of the application inadmissible.

4. Holds that there has been no violation of the Cypriot authorities’ positive obligation to protect Ms Rantseva’s right to life under Article 2 of the Convention;

5.  Holds that there has been a procedural violation of Article 2 of the Convention by Cyprus because of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into Ms Rantseva’s death;

6.  Holds that there has been no violation of Article 2 of the Convention by Russia;

7. Holds that it is not necessary to consider separately the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention;

8.  Holds that there has been a violation of Article 4 of the Convention by Cyprus by not affording to Ms Rantseva practical and effective protection against trafficking and exploitation in general and by not taking the necessary specific measures to protect her;

9. Holds that there is no need to examine separately the alleged breach of Article 4 concerning the continuing failure of the Cypriot authorities to conduct an effective investigation;

10. Holds that there has been no breach by Russia of its positive obligations under Article 4 of the Convention to take operational measures to protect Ms Ranseva against trafficking;

11. Holds that there has been a violation of Article 4 of the Convention by Russia of its procedural obligations to investigate the alleged trafficking;

12.  Holds that there has been a violation of Article 5 of the Convention by Cyprus;

13.  Holds

(a)  that the Cypriot Government is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 40,000 (forty thousand euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage and EUR 3,150 (three thousand one hundred and fifty euros) in respect of costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant on these amounts;

(b)  that the Russian Government is to pay the applicant, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 2,000 (two thousand euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant on this amount;

(c)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;

14.  Dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 7 January 2010, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis