Lexploria

THIRD SECTION

CASE OF A.C. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

( Application s no s . 46966/14 and 7 others -

see appended list )

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

14 June 2018

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

In the case of A.C. and O thers 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 complaints under Article 13 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 are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

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

11. Some applicants submitted complaints 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 . APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

12. 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.”

13. 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.

14. 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 applications admissible;

3. Holds that these applications 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 14 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]

46966/14

27/09/2014

A.C.

22/12/1979

IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region

17/09/2012 to

25/07/2014

1 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 9 day(s)

IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region

24/08/2014 to

07/11/2015

1 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 15 day(s)

IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region

06/12/2015 to

05/10/2016

10 month(s)

IK-56 Sverdlovsk Region

28/11/2016

pending

More than 1 year(s) and

4 month(s) and 24 day(s)

3.8- 7 m²

3.8-7 m²

no or restricted access to warm water, no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food, no sewage system in the detention facility, inmates use a bucket as a lavatory pan and then take it outside daily to a cesspool from which an awful odour spreads, the same facility as in the case of Gorbulya v. Russia (no. 31535/09, 6 March 2014); Romanenko v. Russia (no. 34310/12, 7 February 2017), lack of or insufficient electric light

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

15,300

14076/16

30/08/2016

Andrey Fedorovich Avdulov

21/12/1977

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

14/09/2008

pending

More than 9 year(s) and

7 month(s) and 7 day(s)

14 inmate(s)

2.3 m²

overcrowding, inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to running water, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air

10,000

45716/16

03/10/2016

Vladimir Nikolayevich Lanochkin

25/07/1972

IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region

22/11/2015

pending

More than 2 year(s) and

4 month(s) and 30 day(s)

135 inmate(s)

1.6 m²

overcrowding, inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to running water, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air

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

9,300

57406/16

13/09/2016

Vladimir Igorevich Ovadenko

28/01/1987

IK-1 Syktyvkar

23/08/2013

pending

More than 4 year(s) and

7 month(s) and 29 day(s)

100 inmate(s)

1.8 m²

4 toilet(s)

overcrowding, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air

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

10,000

60447/16

07/10/2016

Leonid Vasilyevich Petrov

10/03/1982

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma Region

10/07/2015 to

09/10/2017

2 year(s) and 3 month(s)

100 inmate(s)

2 m²

overcrowding, lack of or insufficient electric light, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to running water

8,300

60737/16

11/10/2016

Aleksey Vitalyevich Zverev

10/06/1977

Alekseyeva Natalya Vasilyevna

Krsanoyarsk

IK-16 Krasnoyarsk Region

23/08/2012

pending

More than 5 year(s) and

7 month(s) and 29 day(s)

2 m²

4 toilet(s)

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to shower

9,800

51002/17

03/07/2017

Sergey Vladimirovich Yesin

16/04/1971

IK-11 Nizhniy Novgorod Region

26/02/2012

pending

More than 6 year(s) and

1 month(s) and 26 day(s)

135 inmate(s)

1.4 m²

6 toilet(s)

overcrowding, poor quality of food, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to warm water, no or restricted access to shower, lack or insufficient quantity of food

7,500

53613/17

14/07/2017

Vadim Valeryevich Gogin

29/05/1961

Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich

Kostroma

IK-1 Kostroma Region

27/12/2014 to

04/07/2017

2 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 8 day(s)

100 inmate(s)

2 m²

inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to shower, overcrowding, poor quality of food

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

5,000

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