issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 033 (2022)
01.02.2022
Judgments of 1 February 2022
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing 14 judgments1:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
12 Committee judgments, concerning issues which have already been examined by the Court, can be
The judgments summarised below are available only in English.
Kramareva v. Russia (application no. 4418/18)
The applicant, Anastasiya Olegovna Kramareva, is a Russian national who was born in 1990 and lives
in Lyubertsy (Russia).
The case concerns a labour dispute.
In July 2016 the State company Mosecostroy, where the applicant worked part-time, terminated her
employment contract on the grounds that another employee had been employed to perform the
same duties on a full-time basis. She brought proceedings against the company and her claims were
allowed in part, but the courts ruled that the termination of her employment contract had been
lawful.
The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on
Human Rights that a fair balance between the parties had not been respected in the proceedings.
No violation of Article 6
Manannikov v. Russia (no. 9157/08)
The applicant, Aleksey Petrovich Manannikov, is a Russian national who was born in 1956 and lives
in Moscow.
The case concerns the applicant’s conviction of an administrative offence for his failure to follow
police orders to take down an allegedly provocative anti-Putin banner which he displayed during a
public event organised in the run-up to the legislative elections of December 2007.
Relying on Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention, the applicant complains
of his conviction and the fine imposed on him as a result, both of which had been upheld on appeal.
No violation of Article 10
This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. Decisions,
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a
panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and
deliver a final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the
Convention, judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
