FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 7528/16 Sergiu Ionuţ MUREŞAN against Romania and 5 other applications (see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24 May 2018 as a Committee composed of:

Vincent A. De Gaetano, President, Georges Ravarani , Marko Bošnjak , 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 declaration s submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application s 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 Romanian Government (“the Government”) .

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 .

After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declaration s with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application s in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The Government acknowledged the inadequate conditions of detention. They offered to pay the applicant s the amount s detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application s 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 declaration s several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicant s accepting the terms of the declaration s .

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 application s 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 case s 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, RezmiveÈ™ and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declaration s 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 application s (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 application s (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration s , the application s 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 case s 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 declaration s and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the application s out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 14 June 2018 .

Liv Tigerstedt Vincent A. De Gaetano 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 name

Date of birth

Representative name and location

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) [i]

7528/16

27/04/2016

Sergiu Ionuţ Mureşan

28/09/1987

Alexandru Mitrean

Cluj-Napoca

05/02/2018

-

900

7972/16

29/02/2016

Volodea Nicolae Cureleac

09/06/1994

05/02/2018

-

2,700

20058/16

21/07/2016

Zabar -Andrei Lingurar

05/05/1985

07/02/2018

-

2,700

32405/16

05/07/2016

Constantin Cocâlnău

21/09/1977

07/02/2018

-

4,500

33993/16

28/06/2016

Constantin-Gabriel Zota

14/10/1989

06/02/2018

-

2,700

72763/16

15/12/2016

Iulian- Dumitru Radu

31/10/1993

30/01/2018

-

2,700

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