Communicated on 28 September 2017
FOURTH SECTION
Application no. 15977/16
Artūras LAPINSKAS
against Lithuania
lodged on 18 March 2016
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Artūras Lapinskas, is a Lithuanian national who was born in 1972 and lives in Naujamiestis.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant was detained in the Pravieniškės Correctional Facility from 10 August 2005 until an unspecified date. Sometime in 2014, whilst still being detained in that facility, he submitted a civil claim against the State, alleging that the conditions of his detention were inhuman and degrading, in particular, that the bed linen was being changed less than once a week, the lighting and ventilation were inadequate, the toilets were dirty, and the living area was infested with bugs and cockroaches. He claimed 35,000 Lithuanian litai (LTL; approximately 10,100 euros (EUR)) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
On 24 November 2014 the Kaunas Regional Administrative Court partly allowed the applicant’s claim. It examined reports by various domestic authorities which had inspected the correctional facility, and concluded that all of the applicant’s allegations were sufficiently proven. The court therefore concluded that during the entire period from the applicant’s arrival at the facility (10 August 2005) until the day when he submitted his claim to the court (the court did not specify the latter date), he had been detained in unsuitable conditions, in breach of several domestic hygiene regulations. The applicant was awarded LTL 1,000 (approximately EUR 289) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
On 8 October 2015 the Supreme Administrative Court upheld the first‑instance court’s decision in its entirety.
B. Relevant domestic law and practice
For relevant domestic law and practice concerning conditions of detention, see Mironovas and Others v. Lithuania (nos. 40828/12 and 6 others, §§ 50-60, 8 December 2015).
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains that he was detained in inhuman and degrading conditions, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, in view of the conditions of his detention (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149-59, 10 January 2012)?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy