FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF TOPOR AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application nos. 905/15 and 13 others
– see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
30 July 2020
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Topor and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,
Georges Ravarani,
Jolien Schukking, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 9 July 2020,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Romania 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 Romanian 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 under Article 3 of the Convention of the inadequate conditions of their detention. In application no. 810/16 the applicant also raised another complaint under the same provision of the Convention.
THE LAWJOINDER 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.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, 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 ‑141, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑159, 10 January 2012).
8. In the leading case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017, 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.REMAINING COMPLAINTS
11. In application no. 810/16 the applicant also raised another complaint under Article 3 of the Convention.
12. The Court has examined the above 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, this complaint either does not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or does not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
13. 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.”
14. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. In application no. 54752/15 the applicant also claimed pecuniary damage. The Court dismisses this claim since the applicant has failed to demonstrate the existence of a causal link between the violation found and the pecuniary damage alleged.
15. 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,Decides to join the applications;Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of the application no. 810/16 inadmissible;Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;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.Dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claims for just satisfaction in application no. 54752/15.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 30 July 2020, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv TigerstedtStéphanie Mourou-Vikström
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’s name
Date of birth
Representative’s name and location
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
Sq. m per inmate
Specific grievances
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
905/15
23/12/2014
Anișoara TOPOR
05/12/1960
Ion Bratu
Focșani
Vrancea County Police Inspectorate and Mândrești and Bacău Prisons
03/07/2014 to
08/03/2016
1 year and 8 months and 13 days
-
lack of or insufficient natural light, inadequate temperature, lack or insufficient quantity of food, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, no or restricted access to warm water, infestation of cell with insects/rodents
3,000
12190/15
16/04/2015
Costică BULIGA
b: 07/03/1965
d: 15/09/2017
pursued by heirs:
Ovidiu-Constantin BULIGA
Cristina-Elena BULIGA (married GHERASIM)
Iași and Botoșani Prisons
09/10/2013 to 02/09/2016
2 years and 10 months and 24 days
1.26-2.25 m²
overcrowding, lack of adequate ventilation and lighting, lack of an adequate space to store goods and food, poor quality of food and of running water, poor conditions of hygiene in the cell and in the courtyard.
3,000
27791/15
03/06/2015
Dragoș-George BÎLTEANU
02/08/1977
Gheorghe Dragomir
Bucharest
Bucharest Arrest Facility no. 1
09/12/2014 to
08/04/2015
4 months
1.64-1.65 m²
overcrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, poor quality of potable water, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities
1,000
45821/15
10/09/2015
Cristian COSTRAȘ
30/01/1971
Daniela Tonică
Huși
Iași, Gherla, Bistrița and Tulcea Prisons
16/08/1999 to
18/07/2015
15 years and 11 months and 3 days
1.23 - 2.41 m²
overcrowding (save for 16/01/2014-04/09/2014 and 24/11/2014-02/12/2014), lack of (sufficient) natural light, infestation of the cell with insects, poor conditions of hygiene, insufficient access to warm water
5,000
54752/15
09/02/2016
Georg Manfred SCHUSTER
02/11/1975
Werner Krempels
Freiburg
Sibiu County Police Inspectorate, Aiud and Bârcea Mare (Deva) Prisons
09/10/2014 to
28/11/2016
2 years and 1 month and 20 days
1.85-2.87 m²
overcrowding (save for 08-28/12/2014 and 28/01/2015-23/06/2015), poor quality of food, no out of cell physical exercise over the weekends, insects
3,000
62681/15
18/01/2016
Lucian Andrei TOPALĂ
12/11/1987
Vaslui Police Inspectorate Facility and Iași, Arad, Timișoara and Vaslui Prisons
21/11/2012 to
09/03/2016
3 years and 3 months and 18 days
1.06-2.25 m²
overcrowding (save for 17/09/2013- 17/04/2014), lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to toilet, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell
3,000
810/16
12/05/2016
Sever-Vergeliu
MARC-MENYHARD
11/02/1956
Gherla Penitentiary
03/11/2015 to
23/08/2016
9 months and 21 days
1.19 m²
overcrowding, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of requisite medical assistance
1,000
11515/16
07/05/2016
Ovidiu-Marius GOIA
15/02/1988
Colibași, Jilava, Timișoara, Arad, Rahova, Bistrița, Drobeta-Turnu Severin, Iași and Botoșani Prisons
21/07/2010 to
04/05/2016
5 years and 9 months and 14 days
1.46 – 2.17 m²
overcrowding (save for 29/02/2012 to 02/09/2014), mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents
5,000
21643/16
30/06/2016
Remus CONSTANTIN
13/06/1972
Irina Maria Peter
Bucharest
Rahova, Ploiești, Mărgineni, Arad and Jilava Prisons
09/03/2014 to
08/09/2016
2 years and 6 months
0.59 – 2.89 m²
overcrowding (save for 28/12/2014-06/01/2015, 07/02/2015, 13-21/02/2015 and 21/12/2015 to 08/09/2016), poor quality of bedding, insects, small courtyard, restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, inadequate sanitary facilities, insufficient hygienic products
3,000
24481/16
05/07/2016
Cristian BORZOȘ
19/02/1991
Codlea, Rahova and Bistrița Prisons
10/10/2014 to
17/08/2016
1 year and 10 months and 8 days
1.32-2.79 m²
overcrowding (save for 10-31/10/2014), lack of intimacy, inadequate sanitary facilities, mouldy and dirty cell, bunk beds, poor quality of food, insects
3,000
27480/16
06/05/2016
Mihaela DRĂGAN
06/04/1978
Arad Prison
23/09/2014 to
15/12/2015
1 year and 2 months and 23 days
lack of constant electric light, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell
3,000
42876/16
14/07/2016
Marian-Petre ERDEI
19/03/1974
Caraș Severin County Police Inspectorate and Timișoara Prison
25/09/2014 to
26/07/2016
1 year and 10 months and 2 days
1.15 - 1.33 m²
overcrowding (save for 01/01/2016-26/07/2016), inadequate sanitary facilities/courtyard, poor quality of food/bedding, lack of furniture
3,000
44378/16
21/07/2016
Nicolae-Andrei GURZA
22/05/1982
Bucharest Police Inspectorate no. 19 and Jilava and Găești Prisons
04/11/2013 to
22/01/2016
2 years and 2 months and 19 days
1.13-2.2 m²
overcrowding (save for 12/10/2015 to 23/01/2016), poor quality of food/bedding, insects, lack of furniture/storage, dirty and mouldy cell, inadequate sanitary facilities, insufficient fresh air/natural light
3,000
56029/16
16/09/2016
Claudiu-Ionuț KOVACS
08/10/1986
Norica Mirela Turiac
Bucharest
Bucharest Central Arrest and Rahova, Colibași, Giurgiu and Jilava Prisons
25/03/2010 to
17/05/2016
6 years and 1 month and 23 days
1.25 – 2.81 m²
overcrowding (save for 19/02/2012 - 16/06/2014), inadequate sanitary facilities, lack of natural light/furniture, insects, passive smoking, insufficient sleeping places (Bucharest Central Arrest), poor quality of bedding
5,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy