Legal issue: how should proceed a court which has the task of reviewing a civil case on the grounds of emergence of new circumstances if two incompatible new circumstances are present simultaneously, namely, contradictory legal opinions of the Сonstitutional Court of Russia and European Court of Human Rights as to whether applicable rules of Russian law are conformant to the Constitution of Russia, on the one hand, and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, on the other?  

Ratio decidendi: if there is a conflict between legal opinions of the Constitutional Court and of the European Court of Human Rights as regards the assessment of legal rules subject to application in a particular case, such conflict raises the question of their constitutionality. If the position of the Constitutional Court has been expressed in its ruling, by which the application of petitioner has been dismissed on the grounds of inadmissibility, the ordinary court which would subsequently take the case in which such conflict arises may apply to the Constitutional Court with the request to review the constitutionality of the contested rules once again. The ground for such application may be final decision of the European Court as regards non-conformance of applicable rules to the European Convention. If, as a result of such new consideration, the Constitutional Court finds the rules in question to be conformant to the Russian Constitution, it is up the Constitutional Court itself to determine, within its competence, possible constitutional ways of realisation of the judgment of the European Court.