LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
VASILYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 35949/17;42034/17;73718/17;73965/17;74261/17;79684/17;79830/17;4145/18;5899/18;6131/18 • ECHR ID: 001-192243
Document date: March 7, 2019
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 1
VASILYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA
Doc ref: 35949/17;42034/17;73718/17;73965/17;74261/17;79684/17;79830/17;4145/18;5899/18;6131/18 • ECHR ID: 001-192243
Document date: March 7, 2019
Cited paragraphs only
THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 35949/17 Dmitriy Viktorovich VASILYEV against Russia and 9 other applications (see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 7 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,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicant s is set out in the appended table.
The applicant s ’ 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 Article 13 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 Article 13 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 applicant s were sent the terms of the Government ’ s unilateral declarations 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, 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).
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 (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.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 28 March 2019 .
Liv Tigerstedt Alena Poláčková Acting Deputy 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 comments,
if any
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and
costs and expenses
per applicant
(in euros) [1]
35949/17
11/05/2017
Dmitriy Viktorovich Vasilyev
12/04/1979
23/01/2018
09/04/2018
8,000
42034/17
27/05/2017
Denis Srgeyevich
Serzhanin
02/05/1982
Butrimenko Marianna Dmitriyevna
Volgograd
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention –
16/01/2018
28/03/2018
5,000
73718/17
07/10/2017
Rifat Nailovich Khismatullin
01/01/1966
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
03/04/2018
17/05/2018
4,500
73965/17
26/09/2017
Anatoliy Vasilyevich Zavyalov
16/03/1969
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
03/04/2018
18/05/2018
4,500
74261/17
04/10/2017
Oleg Klimovich Aksenov
16/01/1963
03/04/2018
25/07/2018
4,500
79684/17
11/11/2017
Aleksey Sergeyevich Lyubimov
29/04/1978
22/05/2018
11/07/2018
4,500
79830/17
13/11/2017
Vladimir Gennadyevich Matveyev
10/06/1979
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
22/05/2018
28/06/2018
4,500
4145/18
11/12/2017
Mavlet Khatipovich Safin
19/08/1961
23/07/2018
17/09/2018
4,500
5899/18
17/01/2018
Yevgeniy Mikhaylovich Safonov
26/06/1980
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention -
14/09/2018
03/11/2018
4,500
6131/18
20/01/2018
Nikolay Yuryevich Shilyayev
18/03/1983
14/09/2018
30/10/2018
4,500
[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
