THIRD SECTION
CASE OF DOLGOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 7369/09 and 7 others -
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
12 October 2017
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Dolgov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Luis López Guerra, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Jolien Schukking, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 21 September 2017,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The applications were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 3
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
7. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case‑law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90‑94, ECHR 2000‑XI, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139‑165, 10 January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 36–40, 7 April 2005).
8. In the leading case of Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate.
10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
III. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW
11. Some applicants submitted complaints which also raised issues under the Article 13 of the Convention, in accordance with the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, §§ 38-45, 28 November 2013.
IV. REMAINING COMPLAINTS
12. In application no. 7369/09, the applicant also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.
13. The Court has examined the application and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
14. It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
V. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
15. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
16. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, (just satisfaction), no. 5993/08, 16 October 2014, and Mozharov and Others v. Russia, no. 16401/12 and 9 others, 21 March 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
17. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate 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. Decides to join the applications;
2. Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of the application no. 7369/09 inadmissible;
3. Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;
4. Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);
5. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) 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.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 12 October 2017, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv TigerstedtLuis López Guerra
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant name
Date of birth
Representative name and location
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
Number of inmates per brigade
Sq. m. per inmate
Number of toilets per brigade
Specific grievances
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
7369/09
02/12/2008
Sergey Vladimirovich Dolgov
01/01/1974
Polozova Anna Borisovna
Moscow
Correctional colony no. UCh-398/15
14/10/2006 to
10/06/2010
3 years and 7 months and 28 days
2 m²
9,800
34580/16
10/05/2016
Andrey Ivanovich Onopriyenko
25/06/1966
Butrimenko Marianna Dmitriyevna
Volgograd
IK 9 the Volgograd Region
01/03/2010 to
01/04/2016
6 years and 1 month and 1 day
80 inmates
3 toilets
overcrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, inadequate temperature, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to toilet, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air
5,000
44329/16
09/09/2016
Aleksey Mikhaylovich Petrov
14/05/1976
FKU IK-29 Kirov Region
12/03/2014
pending
More than 3 years and 4 months and 27 days
200 inmates
overcrowding, inadequate temperature, bunk beds, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of fresh air, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, no or restricted access to shower, outside toilets
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
7,800
45603/16
30/09/2016
Denis Valeryevich Naslednikov
21/02/1981
FKU IK-36 Krasnoyarsk Region
30/04/2014
pending
More than 3 years and 2 months and 26 days
115 inmates
1.3 m²
overcrowding, lack of living space, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
7,500
57720/16
20/09/2016
Roman Nikolayevich Petrov
05/04/1978
IK-11 Bor
15/11/2010
pending
More than 6 years and 8 months and 11 days
135 inmates
1.4 m²
infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of privacy for toilet, poor quality of food
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
7,800
65299/16
27/10/2016
Yevgeniy Yevgenyevich Gribkov
21/07/1966
IK-1 Nizhniy Novgorod
10/11/2012 to
18/10/2016
3 years and
11 months and 9 days
130 inmates
3 m²
6 toilets
lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities
5,000
66889/16
07/11/2016
Sergey Mikhaylovich Khrushchev
18/11/1981
UG-42/1 Arkhangelsk
12/09/2014
pending
More than 2 years and 10 months and
14 days
1.6 m²
overcrowding, poor quality of potable water, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities
7,300
73764/16
19/11/2016
Denis Pavlovich Shulga
24/11/1981
IK-7 Tula Region
22/05/2013 to
05/08/2016
3 years and 2 months and 15 days
1.5 m²
10 toilets
lack of privacy for toilet, overcrowding, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of food, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of toiletries, poor quality of potable water, no or restricted access to shower
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
5,000
[1]. Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy