THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 4103/18
Yuriy Vyacheslavovich SHELUKHA against Russia
and 16 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 April 2020 as a Committee composed of:
Alena Poláčková, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Gilberto Felici, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.
The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications.
The Government acknowledged the inadequate conditions of detention. In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by Article 13 of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
The applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
The Court finds that, following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.
It therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the applications insofar as covered by the terms of the unilateral declarations.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list as regards the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and other complaints under the well-established case-law, as covered by the unilateral declarations and described in the appended table.
In application no. 9045/18 the applicant also complained under Article 8 of the Convention about his allocation to a remote penal facility.
The Court has examined that complaint 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, that 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 application no. 9045/18 must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention as regards the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law and covered by the Government’s unilateral declarations (see the appended table);
Declares the remainder of application no. 9045/18 inadmissible.
Liv TigerstedtAlena Poláčková
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
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s acceptance
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1]
4103/18
12/07/2018
Yuriy Vyacheslavovich SHELUKHA
16/07/1987
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
24/03/2020
7,200
9045/18
29/01/2018
Firat Galiyevich SAMIGULLIN
27/01/1959
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
21/01/2020
27/02/2020
4,950
13274/18
25/02/2018
Dmitriy Nikolayevich VELKIN
27/10/1994
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
18/02/2020
24/03/2020
9,450
27704/18
23/07/2018
Nikolay Yakovlevich MEZHOV
16/10/1974
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
24/03/2020
7,650
33267/18
27/06/2018
Valeriy Pavlovich ZHUKOV
10/01/1968
05/02/2019
02/04/2019
4,500
39527/18
15/10/2018
Sergey Yuryevich KLIMENKO
02/12/1982
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
10/03/2020
6,750
39534/18
17/09/2018
Aleksey Anatolyevich GOLUBYATNIKOV
23/07/1981
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
13/03/2020
8,100
42585/18
17/08/2018
Ivan Aleksandrovich ZEMKIN
08/10/1988
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
16/03/2020
6,525
44278/18
22/10/2018
Ivan Aleksandrovich KRESHTOPA
02/05/1989
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
13/03/2020
4,500
56221/18
12/11/2018
Yevgeniy Valeryevich KAZAVKOV
18/04/1978
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
13/03/2020
6,525
59308/18
27/11/2018
Nikolay Mikhaylovich FEDOTOV
20/11/1982
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
18/02/2020
17/03/2020
7,200
7943/19
10/01/2019
Marat Gasanovich KURBANOV
04/11/1985
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
18/02/2020
24/03/2020
7,200
9085/19
26/01/2019
Omar Ismailovich MAMMAYEV
01/04/1976
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
21/01/2020
11/03/2020
4,500
10512/19
07/02/2019
Denis Borisovich SOLODOV
01/10/1984
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
14/01/2020
11/03/2020
6,075
19009/19
13/05/2019
Farkhad Rustamzhanovich KARIMOV
05/06/1981
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
21/01/2020
10/03/2020
4,500
25094/19
22/04/2019
Sergey Aleksandrovich ROZHNEV
08/01/1976
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
18/02/2020
19/03/2020
5,850
32728/19
05/06/2019
Irik Ralifovich IKHSANOV
15/04/1986
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention
21/01/2020
10/03/2020
4,500
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy