Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

KUTKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 60537/17, 79909/17, 79913/17, 1884/18, 3242/18, 7387/18, 8949/18, 11690/18, 12143/18, 13646/18, 1546... • ECHR ID: 001-203683

Document date: June 11, 2020

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 2

KUTKIN AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 60537/17, 79909/17, 79913/17, 1884/18, 3242/18, 7387/18, 8949/18, 11690/18, 12143/18, 13646/18, 1546... • ECHR ID: 001-203683

Document date: June 11, 2020

Cited paragraphs only

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 60537/17 Sergey Sergeyevich KUTKIN against Russia and 18 other applications

(s ee appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 11 June 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 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,

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 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 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 Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The Government acknowledged the inadequate conditions of detention . In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicant s ’ 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 case s .

The terms of the Government ’ s unilateral declarations were sent to the applicants several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicant s accepting the terms of the declarations.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant s wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the inadequate conditions of detention (see, for example, Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications in the part covered by the unilateral declarations (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention ( Josipović v. Serbia ( dec. ), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

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 , as well as other complaints raised under the well-established case-law (see the appended table) as covered by the unilateral declaration s.

The applicants in applications nos. 8949/18 and 15466/18 complained about other periods of detention, not covered by the Government ’ s unilateral declaration. With regard to those periods of detention, the applicants should avail themselves of the new remedy introduced in the Russian Federation, which the Court declared effective in its recent decision of Shmelev and Others v. Russia (( dec. ), nos. 41743/17 and 16 others, 17 March 2020).

It follows that this part of applications nos. 8949/18 and 15466/18 must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s declarations concerning the inadequate conditions of detention as well as the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law, as listed in the appended table , and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike this part of the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention;

Declares the remainder of the applications nos. 8949/18 and 15466/18 inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 2 July 2020 .

Liv Tigerstedt Alena Poláčková Acting Deputy Registrar President

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

Other complaints under well ‑ established case-law

Date of receipt of Government ’ s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant ’ s comments, if any

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant

(in euros) [1]

60537/17

04/08/2017

Sergey Sergeyevich KUTKIN

08/03/1983

Madyudin Aleksey Grigoryevich

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

09/01/2020

4,725

79909/17

13/11/2017

Aleksey Alekseyevich KRYAZHNIKOV

27/10/1980

22/05/2018

11/07/2018

4,750

79913/17

07/11/2017

Denis Nikolayevich MALASHIN

30/04/1984

22/05/2018

03/07/2018

4,500

1884/18

11/12/2017

Viktor Aleksandrovich MAMONOV

17/03/1986

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

31/10/2019

11/12/2019

4,500

3242/18

22/12/2017

Oleg Vladimirovich KONYAKHIN

25/06/1976

Butrimenko Marianna Dmitriyevna

Volgograd

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

06/12/2019

13/01/2020

4,500

7387/18

31/01/2018

Rafis Bulyakbayevich KURBANOV

24/10/1972

14/01/2019

28/03/2019

4,500

8949/18

05/02/2018

Aleksey Vladimirovich RODIONOV

05/03/1980

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

04/10/2018

11/12/2018

5,287

11690/18

27/01/2018

Andrey Aleksandrovich RUSAKOV

19/04/1976

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

03/01/2020

4,500

12143/18

24/02/2018

Anatoliy Mikhaylovich TARASENKOV

17/04/1990

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

04/10/2018

04/12/2018

4,500

13646/18

28/02/2018

Sergey Aleksandrovich FOMIN

22/05/1979

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

03/01/2020

4,500

15466/18

12/03/2018

Aleksandr Vladimirovich STERKHOV

18/06/1992

16/12/2019

17/02/2020

4,500

17606/18

16/03/2018

Anatoliy Valeryevich BOCHKOVSKIY

16/08/1985

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

04/10/2018

04/12/2018

4,500

19022/18

27/03/2018

Olesya Viktorovna PAVLOVA

28/02/1981

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

04/10/2018

04/12/2018

4,500

23263/18

24/04/2018

Eduard Viktorovich NOVIKOV

30/09/1985

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

03/01/2020

4,500

24432/18

03/05/2018

Sergey Aleksandrovich BOGOSLOVSKIY

07/03/1971

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

03/01/2020

4,500

28466/18

08/06/2018

Mikhail Aleksandrovich KOZYNTSEV

15/05/1988

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

11/03/2019

26/04/2019

5,062

36171/18

19/07/2018

Vladimir Vasilyevich ALESHKIN

24/04/1965

11/03/2019

27/05/2019

4,500

45029/18

31/08/2018

Marian Angelov PENEV

29/04/1987

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention and transport,

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport on 01/06/2018 and 02/06/2018; van, train; overcrowding; restricted access to toilet

15/10/2019

5,500

50994/18

02/10/2018

Andrey Nikolayevich NAUMOV

26/08/1987

Matskevich Sergey Viktorovich

St Petersbourg

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

15/10/2019

03/12/2019

4,500

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

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846