THIRD SECTION

CASE OF GORSHKOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

( Application s no s . 12639/17 and 6 others -

see appended list )

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

1 4 June 2018

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

In the case of Gorshkov 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 24 May 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:

Article 3

“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 insofar as they are laid down in the attached table 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 submitted complaints which also raised issues under Article 13 of the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (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 t he 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. 27931/17 and 28598/17, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 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. 27931/17 and 28598/17 inadmissible;

3. Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table ;

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 1 4 June 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 name

Date of birth

Representative 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]

12639/17

03/02/2017

Aleksandr Borisovich Gorshkov

12/06/1986

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma

12/08/2016 to

11/01/2017

5 month(s)

100 inmate(s)

1.9 m²

O vercrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of requisite medical assistance, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, inadequate temperature .

2,500

24702/17

16/03/2017

Dmitriy Sergeyevich Tsygankov

01/07/1978

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-4 Kostroma Region

21/04/2016 to

10/03/2017

10 month(s) and 18 day(s)

110 inmate(s)

1.5 m²

O vercrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or insufficient disinfection of barbering and haircutting tools, inadequate temperature, constant electric light, no or restricted access to potable water, poor quality of potable water, poor quality of food .

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

4,700

25277/17

21/02/2017

Yuriy Aleksandrovich Klionovskiy

03/04/1979

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

IK-7

St Petersburg

05/04/2013 to

11/01/2017

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

1.2 m²

2 toilet(s)

N o or restricted access to running water, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature .

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

5,000

25567/17

17/02/2017

Artem Vladimirovich Kovtun

30/06/1981

Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna

St Petersburg

IK-4

St Petersburg Region

21/02/2013 to

02/11/2016

3 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 13 day(s)

150 inmate(s)

2 m²

3 toilet(s)

L ack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, insufficient number of sleeping places, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water .

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

5,000

27845/17

30/03/2017

Aleksandr Gennadyevich Kostrov

12/07/1978

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma Region

(OT-15/1)

24/03/2016 to

10/03/2017

11 month(s) and 15 day(s)

100 inmate(s)

0.6 m²

O vercrowding, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to shower .

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

5,000

27931/17

28/03/2017

Andrey Aleksandrovich Lebedev

01/02/1961

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma Region

03/10/2016 to

23/11/2016

1 month(s) and 21 day(s)

105 inmate(s)

2 m²

4 toilet(s)

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

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

1,400

28598/17

30/03/2017

Aleksandr Nikolayevich Zagorodniy

21/11/1972

Mudarisov Rif Minetdinovich

Nefteyugansk

IK-11

Khanti-Mansi Autonomous Region

19/09/2014

P ending .

More than3 year(s) and

6 month(s) and 2 day(s)

20 inmate(s)

2.3 m²

P assive smoking, poor quality of food, mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature .

8,000

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