Communicated on 7 January 2014

SECOND SECTION

Application no . 32344/13 Žanas ALEKSANDRAVIČIUS against Lithuania and 13 other applications (see table appended)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

THE FACTS

The applicants are Lithuanian nationals except in application no. 49516/13, where the applicant is a Russian national. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows.

A. Facts

From 23 June to 30 September 2011 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison.

He alleged that the cells were overcrowded and the sanitary conditions were poor. The applicant ’ s health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and anxiety. As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cell no. 121, where the applicant had been held for two days, measured 7.38 square metres and housed one detainee;

(b) cell no. 297, where the applicant had been held for seven days, measured 7.38 square metres and housed from two to three detainees;

(c) cell no. 316, where the applicant had been held for 62 days, measured 7.18 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

(d) cell no. 256, where the applicant had been held for 31 days, measured 23.32 square metres and housed from ten to twelve detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 28 May 2010 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court granted the applicant ’ s claim in part and awarded him 1000 Lithuanian litai (LTL; approximately 290 euros (EUR)). On 4 December 2012 the Supreme Administrative Court upheld the decision of the first-instance court.

The courts established that the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres. However, his allegations about unsanitary conditions and incurred damage to his health were rejected as unsubstantiated.

B. Complaints

The applicant complains under Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention. He also complains that the amount of compensation was discriminatory.

A. Facts

As from 2003 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. He alleged that the cells were overcrowded, the premises were dilapidated and the sanitary conditions were poor. Because of those conditions and the fact that the applicant suffered from epilepsy and kidney ’ s disease, his health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and anxiety.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity for the period from 29 January 2007 to 29 January 2010, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cell no. 106, where the applicant had been held for one day, measured 7.38 square metres and housed six detainees;

(b) cell no. 121, where the applicant had been held for one day, measured 7.38 square metres and housed six detainees;

(c) cell no. 313, where the applicant had been held for 16 days, measured 7.79 square metres and housed from four to six detainees;

(d) cell no. 122, where the applicant had been held for four days, measured 7.94 square metres and housed one detainee;

(e) cell no. 105, where the applicant had been held for three days, measured 7.38 square metres and housed three detainees;

(f) cell no. 334, where the applicant had been held for nine days, measured 7.53 square metres and housed from three to five detainees;

(g) cell no. 118, where the applicant had been held for three days, measured 7.38 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

(h) cell no. 327, where the applicant had been held for six days, measured 7.65 square metres and housed from two to four detainees;

( i ) cell no. 274, where the applicant had been held for three days, measured 7.84 square metres and housed from two to three detainees;

(j) cell no. 120, where the applicant had been held for one day, measured 7.38 square metres and housed five detainees;

(k) cell no. 264, where the applicant had been held for seven days, measured 7.80 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

(l) cell no. 111, where the applicant had been held for two days, measured 7.45 square metres and housed five detainees;

(m) cell no. 377, where the applicant had been held for 22 days, measured 7.28 square metres and housed one detainee;

(n) cell no. 112a, where the applicant had been held for two days, measured 6.34 square metres and housed from three to five detainees;

(o) cell no. 312, where the applicant had been held for two days, measured 7.67 square metres and housed five detainees;

(p) cell no. 270, where the applicant had been held for two days, measured 7.79 square metres and housed from two to four detainees.

In addition, in 2009 the applicant was held alone for 100 days in cells nos. 373, 382 and 383 that were situated in dilapidated premises in a basement and where conditions of detention were particularly degrading. The premises were cold and humid, infested with parasites and rodents and with mould on the walls.

According to a report of 23 February 2010 by the prison authorities no breaches of standards of hygiene and sanitation in those basement cells were found. However, in a report of 9 June 2010 by the Vilnius Public Health Centre the following breaches of standards of hygiene and sanitation were found: the applicant had been held in dilapidated premises with insufficient lighting and heating (the temperature ranged from +15.7 to +16 o C instead of the statutory requirement of +18); non-smokers were held with smokers. In addition, according to a letter of 25 March 2009 of the State Public Healthcare Service the poor condition of the said premises had already been established earlier following complaints from other prisoners.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

After the case was remitted several times for re-examination, on 30 April 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 10 December 2012 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 5,000 (approximately EUR 1,440).

Having regard to the limitation period of three years, the courts held that the applicant was entitled to request damages only for the period from 29 January 2007 to 29 January 2010. It was established that during his detention at Lukiškės Remand Prison the applicant was held for 84 days in overcrowded cells. In addition, his allegations about unsanitary conditions for 100 days in other cells were found to be substantiated. As to the applicant ’ s arguments concerning the deterioration of his health, it was established that his illnesses were of a chronic nature and the deterioration of his health had not been caused by the poor detention conditions. However, the courts admitted that having regard to the nature of his health problems, bad conditions of detention might have caused him considerable inconvenience.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention of ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

From 14 January 2008 to 26 April 2012 the applicant served his prison sentence in the Pravieniškės Correctional House. The applicant submitted that he was held in overcrowded rooms and, as a result, his health was negatively affected.

As regards the size of the rooms and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) room no. 10-4, where the applicant stayed for 32 days, had 1.96 square metres of personal space;

(b) room no. 18-1, where the applicant stayed for a bit more than four months, had 2.03 square metres of personal space;

(c) the remaining rooms where the applicant stayed most of the time during his imprisonment, had from 2.27 to 2.58 square metres of personal space.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 9 July 2012 the Kaunas Regional Administrative Court and on 4 February 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 1,000 (approximately EUR 290).

Having established that the applicant had stayed in overcrowded rooms for most of his imprisonment, the courts took into account the fact that the regime at the Correctional House was less strict than that of a prison: detainees have the possibility during the prescribed schedule to move around freely in the grounds and premises of the Correctional House and to engage in sport, religious and other activities, while living rooms are mainly reserved for sleeping. The courts dismissed as unfounded the applicant ’ s allegations about the deterioration of his health.

B. Complaints

The applicant complains under Articles 3 and 14 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention. He also complains that the amount of compensation was discriminatory.

A. Facts

From 20 October 2008 to 10 November 2010 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. On several occasions for short periods of time he was held elsewhere.

The applicant submitted that he was held in overcrowded and dilapidated cells. They were cold and humid, without proper ventilation, infested with parasites and rodents and with mould on the walls. As a result, the applicant ’ s health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and anxiety.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established that the cells measured from 7.53 to 8.11 square metres and housed from two to four detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 7 September 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 25 February 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 1,000 (approximately EUR 290).

Having regard to the limitation period of three years, the courts held that the applicant was entitled to request damages only for the period from 3 April 2009 to 10 November 2010. It was established that during 556 days of his detention at Lukiškės Remand Prison the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 5 square metres and, later, 3.6 square metres. His allegations about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

From 20 October 2010 to 31 May 2011 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. On several occasions for short periods of time he was held elsewhere.

The applicant submitted that he was held in overcrowded and dilapidated cells. They were cold and humid, without proper ventilation, infested with parasites and rodents and with mould on the walls. There was a toilet, a sink and a table with chairs in each cell; that furniture significantly reduced free space in the cells. He was entitled to a one-hour walk every day in a courtyard. He further submitted that while in the prison he was often moved around different cells. Because of those conditions, the applicant ’ s health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and anxiety.

During the applicant ’ s stay in cells nos. 150, 152 and 165 their disinfection was carried out.

The applicant submitted that the cells measured approximately 8 square metres and usually housed four detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 7 September 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 25 February 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 1,000 (approximately EUR 290).

The courts established that for more than seven months of his detention at Lukiškės Remand Prison the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres; for considerable periods of time he had had less than 2 square metres of personal space.

As regards his repetitive transfers between different cells, the courts found them proportionate and justified by the prison authorities ’ intent to avoid even greater overcrowding in certain cells. The applicant ’ s allegations about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

As from 23 June 2009 the applicant was held at Å iauliai Remand Prison. He alleged that the cells were overcrowded and the sanitary conditions were unsatisfactory; there was mould on the walls, humidity, and no proper heating and ventilation. The applicant was placed together with persons having serious contagious diseases. His health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and insomnia.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cell no. 63, where the applicant had been held from 29 June 2009 to 20 April 2011, measured 18.16 square metres and housed from three to eight detainees;

(b) cell no. 30, where the applicant had been held from 20 April to 25 May 2011, measured 23.37 square metres and housed from five to eight detainees;

(c) cell no. 104, where the applicant had been held from 31 May to 18 October 2011, measured 18.86 square metres and housed from four to eight detainees;

(d) cell no. 32, where the applicant had been held from 25 October 2011, measured 20.21 square metres and housed from six to eight detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 23 April 2012 the Šiauliai Regional Administrative Court and on 6 February 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 200 (approximately EUR 60).

The courts established that the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres. However, his arguments about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaints

The applicant complains about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention. He also complains that the amount of compensation was discriminatory.

A. Facts

From 23 June 2009 to 16 June 2010 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. He alleged that the cells were overcrowded and their sanitary conditions were unsatisfactory. His health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and insomnia.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cell no. 104, where the applicant had been held for one day, measured 7.38 square metres and housed one detainee;

(b) cell no. 131, where the applicant had been held from 21 to 27 July 2009, measured 7.94 square metres and housed from two to four detainees;

(c) cell no. 299, where the applicant had been held from 27 July to 5 November 2009, measured 7.87 square metres and housed from two to four detainees;

(d) cell no. 175, where the applicant had been held from 5 to 20 November 2009, measured 20.21 square metres and housed from six to eight detainees;

(e) cell no. 159, where the applicant had been held from 20 November 2009 to 4 January 2010, measured 7.94 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

(f) cell no. 169, where the applicant had been held from 5 January 2009 to 19 February 2010 and from 20 March to 21 April 2010, measured 7.94 square metres and housed from two to four detainees;

(g) cell no. 189, where the applicant had been held from 19 February to 20 March 2010, measured 7.86 square metres and housed from six to eight detainees;

(h) cell no. 145, where the applicant had been held from 21 April to 7 May 2010, measured 7.94 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

( i ) cell no. 299A, where the applicant had been held from 7 to 24 May 2009, measured 7.45 square metres and housed from three to four detainees;

(j) cell no. 253, where the applicant had been held from 24 May to 9 June 2010, measured 34.43 square metres and housed from eight to eleven detainees;

(k) cell no. 118, where the applicant had been held on 11 June 2010, measured 7.38 square metres and housed one detainee;

(l) cell no. 109, where the applicant had been held from 12 to 14 June 2010, measured 7.31 square metres and housed from one to two detainees;

(m) cell no. 382, where the applicant had been held from 14 to 16 June 2010, measured 7.25 square metres and housed from one to four detainees;

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 23 October 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 5 July 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 5,000 (approximately EUR 1,440).

The courts established that for 319 days the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 (5.0) square metres. However, his arguments about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

The applicant was held at Å iauliai Remand Prison.

He submitted that from 11 January to 3 November 2011 he was held in unsatisfactory conditions in sometimes dilapidated cells. They were cold, without proper ventilation and lighting. In some cells the toilet was not isolated from the rest of the cell. His health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress.

As regards the cells not conforming to the standards of hygiene and sanitation, the applicant identified the following:

(a) cell no. 9, where the applicant had been held for 196 days;

(b) cell no. 104, where the applicant had been held for two days;

(c) cell no. 29, where the applicant had been held for two days;

(d) cell no. 37, where the applicant had been held for seven days.

In a report of 19 April 2012 by the Å iauliai Public Health Centre, breaches of standards of hygiene and sanitation were found in cell no. 104 and some other cells of the prison. In a report of 13 November 2012 the Health Centre noted that the irregularities in cells nos. 29 and 37 had been fixed as from 6 September 2012. Fixing of the irregularities in cell no. 9 was not possible due to a lack of resources.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 21 December 2012 the Šiauliai Regional Administrative Court and on 17 July 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court established that the applicant had been held in detention in breach of the domestic law requirements and experienced some inconvenience. However, no compensation was awarded to him. The courts considered that the finding of a violation constituted in itself a sufficient just satisfaction and dismissed the applicant ’ s allegations about the deterioration of his health as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

From 15 December 2009 to 8 February 2012 the applicant was held at Å iauliai Remand Prison. He alleged that the cells were dilapidated and their sanitary conditions were unsatisfactory. There was no proper heating, ventilation and lighting; the premises were cold and humid with mould on walls; the toilet was not isolated from the rest of the cell; there was no sink in one of the cells. The prison authorities did not provide detainees with cleaning equipment and supplies.

The applicant ’ s health deteriorated with time: his eyesight got worse and he started suffering from a joint disease, back pain and distress. He is being treated for the joint disease while in prison. As from 30 March 2011 he was diagnosed with osteochondrosis of the spine and treatment was prescribed.

The cells not conforming to the standards of hygiene and sanitation, as established by the Å iauliai Public Health Centre in reports of 13 January and 2 May 2011, 25 April and 27 June 2012 were:

(a) cell no. 95, where the applicant had been held from 15 December 2009 to 23 March 2010;

(b) cell no. 55, where the applicant had been held from 29 March 2010 to 3 February 2011;

(c) cell no. 101, where the applicant had been held from 14 February to 28 April 2011 and from 30 June to 1 July 2011;

(d) cell no. 54, where the applicant had been held from 15 to 30 June 2011;

(e) cell no. 49, where the applicant had been held from 1 July to 4 October 2011;

(f) cell no. 14, where the applicant had been held from 10 October to 30 November 2011.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 28 December 2012 the Å iauliai Regional Administrative Court and on 11 June 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court established that the applicant had been held in unsatisfactory conditions in one of the cells and the prison authorities had failed to provide him with cleaning supplies as set out in internal regulations. The courts refused to address the issue of overcrowding as it had not initially been raised before the court of first instance. An amount of LTL 300 (approximately EUR 60) was awarded on account of distress and inconvenience that the applicant had experienced.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

From 25 February 2011 to 27 August 2012 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. On several occasions for short periods of time he was held elsewhere.

He alleged that the cells were overcrowded and non-smokers like him were held with smokers, and first time convicted detainees with old prisoners. There was no proper lighting and the toilet was not isolated from the rest of the cell.

Because of those conditions he got severely ill and a neuropathy was diagnosed; he also suffered from distress.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cells nos. 107, 343, 123, 219, 158, 110, 375, 112A, 342, 378, 195, 222, 221, 370, 287, 177, 164, 197, 128, 298, 356, 185, 116, 141, 144, 108, 130 and 223 measured from 6.34 to 8.31 square metres and usually housed from two to four detainees, on rare occasions, up to six detainees;

(b) cell no. 252, where the applicant had been held from 29 July to 24 August 2012, measured 42.33 square metres and housed from four to seven detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 2 January 2013 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 28 May 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 1,000 (approximately EUR 290).

It was established that the applicant most of the time had stayed in overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres. Relying on a specialist ’ s report the courts found that the applicant ’ s illness was genetically predetermined and thus dismissed his allegations about the impact of the conditions of detention on the deterioration of his health.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

From 20 May 2010 to 24 February 2012 the applicant was serving his sentence at Vilnius Correctional House.

He was held in poor conditions. As a result, he suffered from distress and insomnia; his eyesight and mental state worsened. From 2 to 9 September 2011 the applicant was hospitalised and an antisocial personality disorder was diagnosed.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) room no. 4-414 where the applicant had been held from 20 May 2010 to 16 September 2011 measured 14.41 square metres and housed six detainees; the room was overcrowded and without proper lighting;

(b) room no. 8 where the applicant had been held from 16 September 2011 to 24 February 2012, had no proper lighting and unsatisfactory sanitary conditions.

According to the internal regulations of the Correctional House the detainees shall be present in their rooms from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. on working days and from 11 p.m. to 8 a.m. on non-working days. The prisoners have a possibility during the prescribed schedule to move around freely in the grounds and premises of the Correctional House.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

As concerns the room no. 4-414, on 15 October 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 25 April 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and found that the conditions of the applicant ’ s stay were in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.1 square metres. No compensation was awarded. The applicant ’ s allegations about the impact of those imprisonment conditions on the deterioration of his health were dismissed.

With regard to the room no. 8, on 26 November 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 1 June 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the applicant ’ s claim as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

A. Facts

From 8 December 2009 to 5 October 2011 and from 4 to 20 July 2012 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison.

1. Detention from 8 December 2009 to 5 October 2011

The applicant submitted that he was held in overcrowded and dilapidated cells. They were infested with parasites and rodents, humid, without proper lighting and with mould on the walls. The applicant, who is a non-smoker, was put together with smokers in the same cell. The detainees convicted for the first time were held together with prisoners having more than one conviction.

As a result, the applicant ’ s health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and anxiety.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cells nos. 134, 107, 172, 117, 140, 307, 168, 151, 158, 198, 385, 311 and 373 where the applicant was held from 8 December 2009 to 5 October 2011 measured from 7.25 to 8.22 square metres and usually housed from three to four detainees;

(b) cell no. 252, where the applicant had been held from 29 July to 24 August 2012, measured 42.33 square metres and housed from four to seven detainees.

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 22 October 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 23 May 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and found that the applicant had indeed been held in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres. Moreover, for 99 days he had been held together with smoking prisoners and for 201 days with prisoners convicted more than once. Compensation of LTL 2,500 was awarded. Relying on a report of the Vilnius Public Health Centre, the courts dismissed as unfounded the allegations of the applicant as to the dilapidated cells, lack of proper lighting and ventilation.

2. Detention from 4 to 20 July 2012

The applicant submitted that from 5 to 20 July 2012 he was held in an overcrowded and dilapidated cell. It was infested with parasites, humid and without proper ventilation. The applicant ’ s eyesight had worsened with time and he suffered from distress and depression.

The domestic courts established that cell no. 404, where the applicant had been held for 16 days, measured 17.02 square metres and housed from five to six detainees.

The applicant also alleged that on 4 July 2012 upon his arrival at the Remand Prison he was held with three other detainees for 2.5 hours in a short-time detention cell which measured 1.5 square metres. The applicant, who is a non-smoker, was put together with smokers. Later the same day he was temporarily transferred to a cell where he was afforded 6.48 square metres of personal space. Both cells were in unsanitary conditions.

On 12 February 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 16 May 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded LTL 350 (approximately EUR 100). The courts found that from 5 to 20 July 2012 the applicant had indeed been held in breach of the statutory requirement of 3.6 square metres. The remaining allegations of the applicant as to unsanitary conditions in cells and the applicant ’ s stay with smokers were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaints

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention. He further complains under Article 13 about inability to obtain adequate compensation.

A. Facts

From 27 October 2009 to 22 November 2010 the applicant was held at Å iauliai Remand Prison. He alleged that the cells were overcrowded and dilapidated, without proper ventilation; the toilet was not isolated from the rest of the cell. The applicant, who is a non-smoker, was put together with smokers in the same cell.

His health had deteriorated with time and he suffered from distress and insomnia.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cell no. 42, where the applicant had been held from 27 October 2009 to 2 July 2010, measured 22.85 square metres and housed from four to eight detainees;

(b) cell no. 49, where the applicant had been held from 21 July to 8 October 2010, measured 20.23 square metres and housed from four to nine detainees;

(c) cell no. 9, where the applicant had been held from 8 to 13 October 2010, measured 16.26 square metres and housed from five to eight detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 12 November 2012 the Šiauliai Regional Administrative Court and on 10 May 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 200 (approximately EUR 60).

The courts established that at least for 17 days the applicant had been held in clearly overcrowded cells in breach of the statutory requirement of 5.0 and, later, of 3.6 square metres. The remaining allegations of the applicant about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed.

B. Complaints

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention. He further complains under Article 13 about inability to obtain adequate compensation.

A. Facts

From 29 November 2007 to 27 September 2011 the applicant was held at Lukiškės Remand Prison. On ten occasions he was held elsewhere. The applicant submitted that the cells were overcrowded and infested with parasites, and without proper lighting. As a result, his eyesight worsened with time and he suffered from distress.

As regards the size of the cells and their holding capacity, the domestic courts established as follows:

(a) cells nos. 121, 141, 161, 109, 132, 160, 146, 155, 304, 385, 119, 172, 320, 114, 272, 118, 267, 122, 282, 297, 117, 265, 278, 122, 285, 107, 282, 123, 116, 319 measured from 6.79 to 8.08 square metres and usually housed from three to four detainees;

(b) cell no. 252, where the applicant had been held from 11 February to 9 March 2010, measured 42.33 square metres and usually housed from twelve to fifteen detainees;

(c) cell no. 400, where the applicant had been held from 21 to 26 July 2010, measured 42.33 square metres and housed from seven to twelve detainees.

The administrative proceedings for damages

The applicant lodged a claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage sustained by being detained in poor conditions.

On 5 November 2012 the Vilnius Regional Administrative Court and on 20 May 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court partially granted the applicant ’ s claim and awarded him LTL 3,000 (approximately EUR 860).

Having regard to the limitation period of three years, the courts held that the applicant was entitled to request damages only for the period from 10 June 2009 to 27 September 2011. It was established that during his detention at Lukiškės Remand Prison the applicant had indeed been held in overcrowded cells; in particular, from 13 July 2009 to 12 January 2010 for 183 consecutive days he had had 1.9-2.6 square metres of personal space. The remaining arguments of the applicant about the deterioration of his health and unsanitary conditions were dismissed as unfounded.

B. Complaint

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about ill-treatment and degrading conditions as regards his detention.

QUESTIONS

1. H ave the applicants been subjected to degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention due to their conditions of detention?

2. Can the applicants still be considered to be victims of a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in view of the decisions by the domestic courts finding violations of the applicants ’ rights?

3. T he Government are requested to provide information about the actions that have been taken to improve the conditions at Lukiškės Remand Prison, Šiauliai Remand Prison and at the Correctional Houses in Pravieniškės and Vilnius after the Court ’ s judgments in Savenkovas v. Lithuania ( no. 871/02, § § 80-82, 18 November 2008) and Karalevičius v. Lithuania ( no. 53254/99, § 39, 7 April 2005) and about any measures of a temporary nature that have been taken or are envisaged.

4. The Government are also requested to provide information about the respective regimes in each of the above-mentioned facilities (inmates ’ daily routine, time spent in cells/rooms, number of inmates in cells/rooms, frequency of outdoor exercise, etc.).

APPENDIX

No.

Application

no.

Lodged on

Applicant name

date of birth

place of residence

Conditions of detention found to be in breach of the applicant ’ s rights by the domestic courts

Detention facility

Period in question

Duration of the applicant ’ s stay in poor conditions as established by the domestic courts

Compensation awarded by the domestic courts

32344/13

11/05/2013

Žanas ALEKSANDRAVIČIUS

11/08/1981

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

June – September 2011

3 months

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

40091/13

10/06/2013

Edmundas BILINSKAS

14/03/1967

Overcrowded cells, approximately 1.5-2.0 sq.m . of personal space

Dilapidated cells, insufficient heating and lighting for 100 days

Non-smokers held with smokers

Lukiškės Remand Prison

January 2007 – January 2010

6 months

LTL 5,000 (approx. EUR 1,440)

40163/13

14/06/2013

Romualdas KLINTOVIČ

28/01/1983

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.0-2.5 sq.m . of personal space

Pravieniškės Correctional House

January 2008 – April 2012

4 years

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

43576/13

10/06/2013

AndrÄ—j GAILIUN

16/06/1982

Overcrowded cells, approximately 1.9-4.0 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

October 2008 – November 2010

1 year 6 months

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

43635/13

25/06/2013

Romualdas Å AULYS

18/12/1974

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.0 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

October 2010 – May 2011

7 months

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

48303/13

22/07/2013

Raimondas VAIVADA

22/02/1959

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.5-6.0 sq.m . of personal space

Å iauliai Remand Prison

June 2009 – October 2011

2 years 4 months

LTL 200 (approx. EUR 60)

49516/13

26/07/2013

Artem NOVIKOV

15/07/1986

Overcrowded cells, approximately 1.0-4.0 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

June 2009 – June 2010

1 year

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

51043/13

29/07/2013

Remigijus VITANIS

18/03/1976

Dilapidated cells

Insufficient heating

No proper ventilation and lighting

Toilets not isolated from the rest of the cell

Å iauliai Remand Prison

January – November 2011

7 months

None

54553/13

20/08/2013

Saulius Å UKYS

19/04/1978

Poor sanitary conditions in one of the cells

Shortage of cleaning inventory

Å iauliai Remand Prison

December 2009 – February 2012

3 months

LTL 300 (approx. EUR 80)

65956/13

09/10/2013

Gražvydas DŪDA

30/05/1974

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.0-3.5 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

February 2011 – August 2012

1 year 4 months

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

66281/13

15/10/2013

Romualdas GASKA

06/02/1958

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.5 sq.m . of personal space

Vilnius Correctional House

May 2010 – February 2012

1 year 3 months

None

70048/13

04/11/2013

Vidas TRAKNYS

20/02/1966

1) Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.0-2.5 sq.m . of personal space

99 days held with smokers

201 days held with prisoners having more than one conviction

2) Overcrowded cells, approximately 3.0-3.5 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

1) December 2009 – October 2011

2) July 2012

1) 1 year 10 months

2) 16 days

1) LTL 2,500 ( approx . EUR 730)

2) LTL 350 ( approx . EUR 100)

70065/13

04/11/2013

Dainius ZELENIAKAS

12/09/1973

Overcrowded cells, approximately 2.0-5.5 sq.m . of personal space

Å iauliai Remand Prison

October 2009 – November 2010

17 days

LTL 1,000 (approx. EUR 290)

71139/13

07/11/2013

Darius ANTONOVAS

17/12/1971

Overcrowded cells, approximately 1.7-3.5 sq.m . of personal space

Lukiškės Remand Prison

June 2009 – September 2011

2 years 2 months

LTL 3,000 (approx. EUR 870)

ITMarkFactsComplaintsEnd