THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 46657/06 Oleg Anatolyevich KHVOSTOV against Russia and 14 other applications

(s ee appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 8 April 2021 as a Committee composed of:

Darian Pavli, President, Dmitry Dedov , Peeter Roosma , judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application s 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 applicant s ’ replies to these declarations,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicant s is set out in the appended table.

The applicants ’ complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial 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 (see the appended table below).

The Government submitted declaration s with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They acknowledged the excessive length of pre-trial detention . In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants ’ rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amount s 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 amount s 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 declaration s .

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 case s 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 application s .

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case s out of the list as regards the complaints concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention and other complaints under the well-established case-law as covered by the declarations (see the appended table below) .

The applicant in application no. 11873/18 also raised a complaint under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention. Having examined it, the Court 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 does not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention.

It follows that this part of application no. 11873/18 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 insofar as covered by the unilateral declarations of the Government which were accepted by the applicants ;

Declares the remainder of application no. 11873/18 inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 29 April 2021 .

             {signature_p_2}

Viktoriya Maradudina Darian Pavli Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention

( excessive length of pre-trial detention )

No.

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant ’ s name

Year of birth

Representative ’ s name and location

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]

46657/06

11/10/2006

Oleg Anatolyevich KHVOSTOV

1970

15/07/2019

05/10/2020

2,700

11873/18

08/02/2018

Yevgeniy Nikolayevich NABIULLIN

1987Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate, compensation for unlawful arrest or detention - The state of Russian law precludes any legal possibility for an applicant to receive compensation for detention effected in breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Korshunov v. Russia, no. 38971/06, § 62, 25 October 2007 and Govorushko v. Russia, no. 42940/06, § 60, 25 October 2007),

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - numerous occasions of transport by van from the detention facility (and back) to the courthouse to take part in hearings since 2015); detention in a convoy cell; overcrowding; restricted access to toilet and potable water; insufficient amount of food,

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport .

02/10/2019

05/01/2021

9,800

30852/18

22/06/2018

Andrey Dmitriyevich NAUMOV

1992Vasilyev Illarion Georgiyevich

Moscow

20/10/2020

04/12/2020

2,030

34042/18

07/07/2018

Yekaterina Anatolyevna BURLAKOVA

1993Uchayeva Olga Aleksandrovna

Mytishchi

20/10/2020

30/11/2020

5,110

36584/18

22/07/2018

Alikhan Magometovich TEMIRKHANOV

1982Golub Olga Viktorovna

Suzemka

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport – 22 round trips between 29/01/2018 and 24/07/2018 from SIZO-1 Moscow to the Preobrazhenskiy District Court of Moscow in an overcrowded van, no heating during winter period; placement in convoy cells of SIZO-1 Moscow and the Preobrazhenskiy District Court - 1 sq. m of personal space, restricted access to toilet, lack of fresh air,

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - detention order of the Preobrazhenskiy District Court of Moscow of 30/03/2018 was upheld on appeal by the Moscow City Court 41 days later, on 10/05/2018,

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - placement in a metal cage in court hearings before the Moscow City Court,

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention - SIZO-1 Moscow from 24/11/2016 to 05/07/2019; 1.4 m² overcrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, poor quality of potable water, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents;

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention .

20/10/2020

07/12/2020

13,940

37094/18

20/07/2018

Artem Mikhaylovich FROLOV

1985Bezrukova Kseniya Yevgenyevna

Moskow

20/10/2020

01/12/2020

1,540

40615/18

15/08/2018

Andrey Nikolayevich CHERKASOV

1978Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich

Syktyvkar

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - transit cell, van, 29/06/2015 to 11/05/2018, 0.16 sq.m ., overcrowding, passive smoking,

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law to complain about poor conditions of transport and placement in a metal cage in court hearings,

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - placement in a metal cage during court hearings in the Syktyvkar Town Court of the Komi Republic .

20/10/2020

30/11/2020

7,000

50751/18

15/10/2018

Grish Gnelovich OGANNISYAN

1987Vorotyntsev Dmitriy Sergeyevich

Rostov-on-Don

20/10/2020

05/01/2021

1,400

52565/18

09/10/2018

Yegor Nikolayevich CHERNOGOROV

1986Golub Olga Viktorovna

Suzemka

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - the detention orders of the Tushinskiy District Court of Moscow of 26/04/2018 and 23/07/2018 were reviewed on appeal by the Moscow City Court on 29/05/2018 and 11/09/2018 respectively,

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport between IZ-4 Moscow and the Tushinskiy District Court of Moscow on over 100 occasions from 12/05/2017 to 08/10/2018 (overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of natural and electric light, no access to potable water and toilet, inadequate temperature),

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law with regard to the inadequate conditions of his transport.

20/10/2020

07/12/2020

8,000

53816/18

06/11/2018

Vadim Pavlovich ROMANOV

1985Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - the applicant was placed in a metal cage during the court hearings before the Bor Town Court leading to the conviction on 05/07/2018.

20/10/2020

05/01/2021

3,000

13429/19

01/03/2019

Sergey Alekseyevich SINEGUBOV

1976Vorotyntsev Dmitriy Sergeyevich

Rostov-on-Don

18/03/2020

07/12/2020

1,400

19513/19

31/03/2019

Fedor Vladimirovich KORABELNIKOV

1997Dvornikov Anton Nikolayevich

Moscow

18/03/2020

11/12/2020

1,050

22834/19

16/04/2019

Aleksandr Fedorovich IVANOV

1968

18/03/2020

12/06/2020

2,000

34235/19

11/06/2019

Yelena Yuryevna ZHURAVLEVA

1968Zhuravleva Viktoriya Vladimirovna

Moscow

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention,

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention - detention in IZ-77/6 and IZ-77-1 in Moscow; from 08/05/2017 to 23/05/2019; lack of fresh air, passive smoking, no ventilation, lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air.

10/04/2020

29/09/2020

10,650

48958/19

03/12/2019

Dmitriy Andreyevich ZAZDRAVNOV

1986Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of and procedural deficiencies in the judicial review of detention - The applicant ’ s detention was extended on 29/07/2019, he filed an appeal on 31/07/2019 and requested his presence at the appeal hearing - his appeal was considered 22 days later (on 22/08/2019) in his absence.

26/10/2020

05/01/2021

2,320

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.