Point of law: whether the plaintiff who won  litigation against the State must take initiative as regards the execution of the court decision or it is the duty of the State itself to do so?

Ratio decidendi: in the opinion of the Presidium, the execution of a court decision is a public duty of the State and should not depend upon any actions of the recoveror with regard to compulsory enforcement of judicial decision. The person in whose favour the court decision has been delivered should not initiate the procedure of its compulsory execution – it is a duty of the state itself, as it follows from the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in cases Metaxas vs Greece of  27 May 2004 and Krasev vs The Russian Federation of 26 June 2008.

Practical consequences: the Judgment does not say that prior court decisions in analogous cases if inconsistent with this interpretation may be reversed in the procedure and within the limits envisaged by Art 311 of the Commercial Procedure Code. All the same, it is the first decision of the Presidium concerning the compensation for the failure to execute a court ruling within a reasonable term.