FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF KYTSKO AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE
(Applications nos. 7937/24 and 7 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
13 November 2025
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Kytsko and Others v. Ukraine,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Andreas Zünd, President,
Diana Sârcu,
Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 October 2025,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Ukraine 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 applicants were represented by Mr A. Pustyntsev, a lawyer practising in Dnipro, Ukraine.
3. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
4. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
5. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. In applications nos. 7937/24 and 8629/24, the applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS6. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 3 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION7. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.
8. The Government submitted that the applicants had failed to exhaust domestic remedies, as they had not sought compensation before the civil courts for damage allegedly sustained as a result of inadequate conditions of detention. However, the Court has found that a compensatory remedy is effective only once the unsatisfactory conditions of detention have ended (see Sukachov v. Ukraine, no. 14057/17, § 113, 30 January 2020). In the present case, the Government did not indicate that the applicants had been released, or that the conditions of their detention had improved in case of their transfer, before they lodged their applications with the Court. The objection must therefore be rejected.
9. The Court further 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, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96‑101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122-41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑59, 10 January 2012).
10. In the leading cases of Melnik v. Ukraine (no. 72286/01, 28 March 2006) and Sukachov, cited above, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
11. The Court also refers to its standard of proof and methods for assessment of evidence in conditions-of-detention cases (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 127-28). In particular, in reply to a prima facie case of ill-treatment, complained of by the applicants, the Government is expected to provide primary evidence showing cell floor plans and the actual number of inmates during the specific periods of the applicants’ detention (see Ananyev and Others, cited above, § 123, and, for example, Sparysh and Kutsmand v. Ukraine [Committee], nos. 49709/18 and 49870/18, 12 September 2024). Other documents and photographs, related to air, food, water quality control, pest control, temperature and luminosity measurements, bathing facilities, privacy of toilet, laundry services, etc., should pertain to cells and periods of the applicants’ detention.
12. 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 during the period indicated in the appended table were inadequate.
13. The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints.
14. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.
OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW15. In applications nos. 7937/24 and 8629/24, the applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given 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 the cases set out in the appended table.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION16. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Sukachov, cited above, §§ 165 and 167), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to join the applications;Declares the applications admissible;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law;Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);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 13 November 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Andreas Zünd
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
Sq. m per inmate
Specific grievances
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros)[1]
7937/24
04/03/2024
Mykola Pavlovych KYTSKO
1978
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
14/03/2019
pending
More than 6 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 19 day(s)
2.7 m²
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower
Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings - 12/03/2019 - pending,
2 levels of jurisdiction (see Nechay v. Ukraine, no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021),
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings - (see Nechay v. Ukraine, no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021)
9,800
7953/24
04/03/2024
Maksym Borysovych POMOGAYBO
1986
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
04/05/2022 to
23/04/2024
1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 20 day(s)
2.7 m²
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of toiletries, passive smoking, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen
4,900
8629/24
19/01/2024
Maksym Valentynovych GALUSHKA
1991
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
16/10/2020
pending
More than 4 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 17 day(s)
2.5 m²
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of privacy for toilet
Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings – 4/10/2020 - pending,
2 levels of jurisdiction (see Nechay v. Ukraine, no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021),
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings - (see Nechay v. Ukraine, no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021)
9,800
8739/24
06/02/2024
Denys Vyacheslavovych MYROSHNYK
1992
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
13/01/2022
pending
More than 3 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 20 day(s)
2.9 m²
overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of toiletries, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food
7,500
36473/24
27/11/2024
Leonid Mykolayovych KOLOMBAY
1978
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
14/08/2020 to
12/02/2025
4 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 30 day(s)
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
12/02/2025
pending
More than 7 month(s) and 21 day(s)
2.2-3.3 m²
2.7 m²
overcrowding, passive smoking, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of toiletries, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light
overcrowding, passive smoking, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of toiletries, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light
7,500
36477/24
27/11/2024
Stanislav Leonidovych YAKOVENKO
1982
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
11/02/2022 to
17/03/2025
3 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 7 day(s)
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
17/03/2025
pending
More than 6 month(s) and 16 day(s)
2.7-3.1 m²
3.1 m²
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light
7,500
36487/24
27/11/2024
Oleksiy Viktorovych GORBACHOV
1979
Kharkiv Pre-Trial Detention Facility
19/09/2019 to
04/10/2022
3 year(s) and 16 day(s)
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
05/10/2022 to
17/12/2024
2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 13 day(s)
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
17/12/2024
pending
More than 9 month(s) and 16 day(s)
2.2-3.3 m²
2.5-3 m²
2.5 m²
overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of toiletries, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food
overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of toiletries, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water
overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of toiletries, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water
7,500
36535/24
27/11/2024
Mykola Mykolayovych RYABIK
1987
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
22/09/2022 to
18/12/2024
2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 27 day(s)
Poltava Detention Facility no. 23
18/12/2024 to
17/03/2025
3 month(s)
2.5-3.1 m²
2.95 m²
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities
5,800
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.