THIRD SECTION

CASE OF PANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

( Application s no s . 42898/17 and 8 others ‑ see appended list )

JUDGMENT

This version was rectified on 11 October 2018 and 5 February 2019 under Rule 81 of the Rules of Court

STRASBOURG

20 September 2018

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Panov and Others v. Russia ,

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

Alena Poláčková , President, Dmitry Dedov , Jolien Schukking , judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having deliberated in private on 30 August 2018 ,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The applications were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”).

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention . Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION

6. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

7. The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants ’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case ‑ law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kud Å‚a v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90 ‑ 94, ECHR 2000 ‑ XI, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139 ‑ 165, 10 January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v. Lithuania , no. 53254/99, §§ 36–40, 7 April 2005).

8. In the leading case of Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants ’ conditions of detention were inadequate.

10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

III. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW

11. Some applicants also complained under Article 13 of the Convention (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Sergey Babushkin , cited above, §§ 38-45 .

IV. REMAINING COMPLAINTS

12. In applications nos. 69411/17 and 71196/17, the applicants also raised other complaints under various Articles of the Convention.

13. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, 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.

It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention .

V . APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

14. Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

15. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, (just satisfaction), no. 5993/08, 16 October 2014, and Mozharov and Others v. Russia, no. 16401/12 and 9 others, 21 March 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

16. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT , UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to join the applications;

2. Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the other complaints under well-established case-law of the Court , as set out in the appended table, admissible, and the remainder of applications nos. 69411/17 and 71196/17 inadmissible;

3. Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention ;

4. Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);

5. Holds

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 2 0 September 2018 , pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Liv Tigerstedt Alena Poláčková Acting D eputy 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

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Inmates per brigade

Sq. m. per inmate

Number of toilets per brigade

Specific grievances

Other complaints under well-established case-law

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

(in euros) [1]

42898/17

14/08/2017

Yuriy Nikolayevich Panov

14/08/1955

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

04/09/2008 to

10/06/2018

9 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 7 day(s)

115 inmate(s)

0,7 m²

inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to warm water, overcrowding, lack of toiletries, lack of fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen

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

7,500

64134/17

21/08/2017

Dani i l [1] Aleksandrovich Zorin

21/01/1979

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-2 Kostroma Region

22/07/2012 to

11/08/2017

5 year(s) and 21 day(s)

1 m²

mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food, overcrowding

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

5,000

67924/17

01/09/2017

Petr Vasilyevich Buyerakov

12/10/1982

IK-11 Nizhniy Novgorod Region

28/11/2016 to

21/08/2017

8 month(s) and 25 day(s)

1.6 m²

no ventilation, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, overcrowding

3,900

68854/17

01/09/2017

Vladimir Valeryevich Lebedev

24/08/1979

IK-5 Krasnoyarsk Region

11/12/2014

pending

More than 3 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 22 day(s)

1.9 m²

overcrowding, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of clothing, lack of privacy for showers, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of requisite medical assistance

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

7,800

69411/17

23/08/2017

Sergey Nikolayevich Radeyko

30/06/1982

IK-5 Krasnoyarsk Region

16/03/2017 to

29/11/2017

8 month(s) and 14 day(s)

IK-5 Krasnoyarsk Region

20/12/2017

pending

More than 6 month(s) and 13 day(s)

105 inmate(s)

3 m²

4 toilet(s)

3 m²

overcrowding, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food

see above

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

5,800

71196/17

18/09/2017

Mikhail Anatolyevich Uvarov

18/05/1988

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

29/10/2016 to

22/03/2017

4 month(s) and 23 day(s)

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

18/04/2017 to

28/04/2017

11 day(s)

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

04/06/2017

pending

More than 1 year(s) and 29 day(s)

6 inmate(s)

2.5 m²

lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, overcrowding

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

6,800

73176/17

29/09/2017

Ali Umarovich S a lekhov [2]

12/08/1968

Born Aleksandr Viktorovich

Kineshma

IK-6 OIK-11 Ivanovo Region

02/10/2013 to

05/05/2017

3 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 4 day(s)

120 inmate(s)

2 m²

4 toilet(s)

overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food

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

5,000

74197/17

09/10/2017

Sergey Sergeyevich Bozhko

04/10/1982

IK-27 Kirov Region

16/06/2010 to

23/06/2017

7 year(s) and 8 day(s)

2 m²

inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, mouldy or dirty cell, overcrowding, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, lack of privacy for toilet

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

5,000

81596/17

08/11/2017

Sergey Ivanovich Pogulyayev

13/02/1965

IK-11 Nizhniy Novgorod Region

01/01/2013

pending

More than 5 year(s) and

6 month(s) and 2 day(s)

135 inmate(s)

1.2 m²

46 toilet(s)

poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower, lack of requisite medical assistance, overcrowding

7,000

[1] . Rectified on 11 October 2008: the text was “ Danil ” .

[2] Rectified on 5 February 2019: the text was “ Selekhov ”.

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