Lexploria

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 8584/17 Nikolay Nikolayevich UTYUZHNIKOV against Russia and 22 other applications

( s ee appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14 May 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 applicants 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, Tahsin Acar v. Turkey (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), as well as other complaints under the well-established case-law covered by the unilateral declarations (see Tomov and Others v. Russia , nos. 18255/10 and 5 others, 9 April 2019).

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, as listed in the appended table, and covered by the Government ’ s unilateral declarations.

The applicants in applications nos. 5874/18 and 36243/18 complained about other periods of detention, not covered by the Government ’ s unilateral declarations. 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, 17March 2020).

It follows that this part of applications nos. 5874/18 and 36243/18 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 applications nos. 5874/18 and 36243/18 inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 4 June 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]

8584/17

01/03/2017

Nikolay Nikolayevich UTYUZHNIKOV

26/04/1980

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

03/12/2019

-

5,175

10637/17

05/04/2017

Yevgeniy Nikolayevich SARAYEV

03/12/1981

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

03/12/2019

-

5,625

33884/17

26/04/2017

Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich CHUKAYEV

27/04/1978

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

03/12/2019

-

6,300

4131/18

29/11/2017

Aleksandr Sergeyevich VINOGRADOV

02/04/1976

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

16/12/2019

-

9,000

5864/18

25/01/2018

Erik Sagatelovich ARUTYUNYAN

09/05/1986

Kiryushkin Andrey Vladimirovich

Dzerzhinsk

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

16/07/2018

-

5,000

5874/18

25/01/2018

Sergey Viktorovich MINEYEV

23/02/1974

Kiryushkin Andrey Vladimirovich

Dzerzhinsk

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

16/07/2018

-

5,000

6346/18

11/12/2017

Yuriy Fedorovich IVANOV

04/06/1976

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

03/12/2019

-

9,675

15251/18

06/03/2018

Vitaliy Valeryevich NEVESELOV

28/09/1978

Matskevich Sergey Viktorovich

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

09/12/2019

4,500

17004/18

17/03/2018

Stanislav Vasilyevich CHERNOV

03/05/1984

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

25/01/2019

-

4,500

19843/18

10/04/2018

Vladimir Andreyevich SMIRNOV

02/12/1992

31/10/2018

15/03/2019

4,500

21636/18

08/04/2018

Sergey Yevgenyevich FEFILOV

06/09/1983

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

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

31/10/2019

12/12/2019

4,500

22561/18

20/06/2018

Andrey Gennadyevich SARAYEV

20/06/1980

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

25/01/2019

-

4,500

22971/18

06/07/2018

Denis Vladimirovich KUZMIN

29/06/1980

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

03/12/2019

-

5,400

23824/18

10/05/2018

Artem Rafailovich ARASLANOV

27/07/1983

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

16/10/2018

-

4,500

27638/18

10/05/2018

Rafis Safargaliyevich VAGAPOV

22/05/1969

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport from 17/12/2017 to 26/01/2018; van, train, transit cells,

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

25/01/2019

23/03/2019

5,500

28873/18

22/05/2018

Artem Aleksandrovich PROKHORENKO

01/07/1985

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport from 17/12/2017 to 26/01/2018; van, train, transit cells,

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

25/01/2019

21/03/2019

5,500

29325/18

14/09/2018

Vasiliy Vladimirovich POPOV

18/03/1978

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

14/01/2020

-

4,500

29397/18

04/06/2018

Konstantin Vladimirovich IZMAYLOV

07/07/1984

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

14/01/2020

-

6,750

31864/18

28/06/2018

Yevgeniy Mikhaylovich KIRICHENKO

03/03/1976

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

05/02/2019

30/04/2019

4,500

31877/18

28/06/2018

Roman Valeryevich NEFEDOV

12/05/1979

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

05/02/2019

08/04/2019

4,500

33307/18

29/06/2018

Ivan Sergeyevich LITVINOV

21/03/1989

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

15/10/2019

09/12/2019

4,500

35573/18

16/07/2018

Sergey Nikolayevich KOTOV

24/11/1975

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

14/01/2020

-

7,200

36243/18

19/10/2018

Nikolay Nikolayevich TSYPLYATKIN

11/02/1969

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

14/01/2020

-

4,500

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

Menu

UTYUZHNIKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

UTYUZHNIKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

LEXI