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

ROZYYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 41917/06, 54786/16, 21658/17, 32429/17, 34809/17, 34897/17, 53384/17, 53739/17, 53763/17, 56244/17, ... • ECHR ID: 001-192669

Document date: March 21, 2019

  • Inbound citations: 2
  • Cited paragraphs: 1
  • Outbound citations: 5

ROZYYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

Doc ref: 41917/06, 54786/16, 21658/17, 32429/17, 34809/17, 34897/17, 53384/17, 53739/17, 53763/17, 56244/17, ... • ECHR ID: 001-192669

Document date: March 21, 2019

Cited paragraphs only

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 41917/06 Batyr Dzhorakulovich ROZYYEV against Russia and 19 other applications (see list appended)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 21 March 2019 as a Committee composed of:

Alena Poláčková , President, Dmitry Dedov , Jolien Schukking , 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, 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 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 declaration s with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They 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 other provisions of the Convention (see appended table). 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 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 declarations 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 these parts 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 inadequate conditions of detention , as well as the other complaints listed in the appended table and covered by the Government ’ s declarations.

Some applicant s also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention.

The Court has examined the application s listed in the appended table and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession, in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence and having regard to the fact that the friendly settlement agreements have covered the main legal questions raised in the present applications, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto or, as concerns application no. 41917/06, there is no need to give a separate ruling on them (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 156, ECHR 2014 with further references),

It follows that this part of the application s must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention and, for application no. 41917/06, left without further examination.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Decides to strike the application s out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention as regards the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as well as the other complaints under well-established case-law listed in the appended table and covered by the friendly settlement ;

Holds that it is not necessary to examine the admissibility and merits of the remaining complaints in application no. 41917/06 and d eclares the remainder of the remaining application s inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 11 April 2019 .

Liv Tigerstedt Alena Poláčková              Deputy Section Registrar President

APPENDIX

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 acceptance

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

(in euros) [1]

41917/06

31/07/2006

Batyr Dzhorakulovich Rozyyev

22/09/1970

Preobrazhenskaya Oksana Vladimirovna

Strasbourg

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention after conviction - detention in a correctional colony in the Vladimir Region between 12/12/2006 and 16/10/2009,

Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention ,

Art. 5 (5) - lack of, or inadequate, compensation for unlawful arrest or detention

13/10/2015

26/02/2016

13,675

54786/16

06/09/2016

Vladimir Rudolfovich Gorskiy

02/05/1983

11/05/2017

19/09/2017

4,675

21658/17

07/03/2017

Sergey Ivanovich Tkachenko

18/12/1983

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

12/10/2017

05/12/2017

7,000

32429/17

21/06/2017

Aleksey Nikolayevich Tsvetkov

25/03/1975

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

Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport – 04/02/2017 van, overcrowding, inadequate temperature

16/01/2018

09/03/2018

5,750

34809/17

14/04/2017

Yuriy Vladimirovich Rakh

06/09/1982

Stasyuk Olga Andreyevna

St Petersburg

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

12/10/2017

13/12/2017

9,750

34897/17

25/04/2017

Mubariz Orudzh Ogly Mamedov

19/01/1972

12/10/2017

07/12/2017

4,090

53384/17

18/07/2017

Eldar Suyundikovich Esbolganov

10/06/1994

Golub Olga Viktorovna

Suzemka

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

16/01/2018

01/03/2018

5,000

53739/17

15/07/2017

Samit Sayfiyevich Tashmatov

01/03/1961

Yezhov Yevgeniy Sergeyevich

Velikiy Novgorod

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

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - Nevskiy District Court of St Petersburg until 21/03/2017 (convicted).

16/01/2018

02/03/2018

9,000

53763/17

06/07/2017

Aleksandr Nikolayevich Shalamov

09/12/1976

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

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

16/01/2018

12/02/2018

1,000

56244/17

03/08/2017

Nuritdin Zayirovich Kurbanov

15/10/1974

Magomedova Roza Saidovna

Moscow

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

20/03/2018

09/05/2018

2,214

58908/17

10/09/2017

Dmitryy Igorevich Smokvin

23/08/1989

Magomedova Roza Saidovna

Moscow

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - Detention order of 02/03/2017. Appeal lodged on 04/03/2017. Appeal hearing on 27/03/2017,

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

20/03/2018

09/05/2018

5,850

68016/17

30/08/2017

Mikhail Alekseyevich Martynov

13/09/1988

Stasyuk Olga Andreyevna

St Petersburg

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

Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - detention following the quashing of the trial judgment by the appeal court on 05/12/2014 and authorisation of detention on remand. Release on 21/03/2017

20/03/2018

01/06/2018

10,000

73461/17

29/09/2017

Ilya Alekseyevich Yegorov

18/12/1986

Belinskaya Marina Aleksandrovna

St Petersburg

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

20/03/2018

01/06/2018

12,825

74178/17

29/09/2017

Islam Rusanbekovich Albogachiyev

22/11/1990

Nevzorov Dmitriy Gennadyevich

St Petersburg

Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - during the 34 hearings in total he was put in the metal cage. Verdict of the Smolensk Regional Court, 29/03/2017.

15/05/2018

13/07/2018

10,000

78882/17

31/10/2017

Andrey Yuryevich Glukhov

22/10/1978

15/05/2018

12/07/2018

2,095

82756/17

20/11/2017

Vladimir Borisovich Dereberya

09/11/1973

Kiryanov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Taganrog

Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - The domestic courts failed to examine "speedily" the applicant ’ s appeals against the detention orders of the Voroshilovskiy Distri c t Court of Rostov-on-Don

16/07/2018

19/09/2018

5,500

83335/17

12/11/2017

Konstantin Yuryevich Gavrilov

26/02/1994

Korobeynikov Grigoriy Anatolyevich

St Petersburg

15/05/2018

04/07/2018

11,477

2229/18

11/12/2017

Sergey Mikhaylovich Vidyakin

11/03/1982

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

16/07/2018

18/09/2018

2,600

3742/18

23/12/2017

Pavel Vladimirovich Zykov

03/04/1983

Vorotyntsev Dmitriy Sergeyevich

Rostov- na - Donu

16/07/2018

17/09/2018

2,460

4536/18

21/12/2017

Roman Viktorovich Firsov

17/06/1983

16/07/2018

04/09/2018

7,380

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

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2024
Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 398107 • Paragraphs parsed: 43931842 • Citations processed 3409255