LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
Sorry, there was an error communicating with our API.
Try refreshing the page, and if the error persists, please try again in a few minutes.
DUDAȘ AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
Doc ref: 22649/17;5731/20;28970/20;30670/20;38537/20;46492/20 • ECHR ID: 001-231125
Document date: January 18, 2024
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 1
DUDAȘ AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
Doc ref: 22649/17;5731/20;28970/20;30670/20;38537/20;46492/20 • ECHR ID: 001-231125
Document date: January 18, 2024
Cited paragraphs only
FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22649/17 Marcel DUDAȘ against Romania and 5 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 18 January 2024 as a Committee composed of:
Faris Vehabović , President , Anja Seibert-Fohr, Anne Louise Bormann , judges ,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Governmentâ€).
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.
Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the present applications are inadmissible.
The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.
The Government argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust the available effective remedies for the complaints about the inadequate conditions of their detention, as the action in tort had become an effective remedy for grievances similar to those of the applicants, allowing them to have the violation of the Convention acknowledged, either explicitly or in substance, and to receive adequate and sufficient compensation at domestic level. The Government expressly referred to Vlad v. Romania ((dec.), no. 122/17, 15 November 2022), either directly in its observations or by a subsequent letter, and invited the Court to declare the cases inadmissible.
The Court recalls that in Polgar v. Romania , no. 39412/19, §§ 94-96, 20 July 2021, it held that an action in tort, based on Articles 1349 and 1357 of the Romanian Civil Code, as interpreted consistently by the national courts, had represented since 13 January 2021 an effective remedy for individuals who considered that they had been subjected to inadequate conditions of detention, and who were no longer being held in conditions that were allegedly contrary to the Convention. Subsequently, in Vlad, cited above, §§ 24-32, the Court considered it appropriate to apply an exception to the general principle that the effectiveness of a given remedy was to be assessed with reference to the date on which the application was lodged.
For all the above reasons and in the light of all the material in its possession, since the applicants ceased to be held in conditions of detention that were allegedly contrary to the Convention after the moment when the tort action had been considered as representing an effective remedy (see, mutatis mutandis , Polgar , § 96 and Vlad , § 23, both cited above; see the appended table for further details), but did not inform the Court of having brought such an action before the domestic courts, their applications must be dismissed for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.
Since the Court has already upheld the Government’s objection on the non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, it does not consider it necessary to examine further additional objections from the Government as to the admissibility of the present applications.
In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that these applications must be dismissed on the ground that domestic remedies had not been exhausted, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 8 February 2024.
Viktoriya Maradudina Faris Vehabović 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’s name
Year of birth
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
22649/17
03/05/2017
Marcel DUDAȘ
1987
Codlea Prison
23/12/2019 to
04/12/2021
1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 11 day(s)
5731/20
29/06/2020
Daniel PANÄ‚
1979
Jilava, Găești, Bucharest Rahova Prisons
23/12/2019 to
17/06/2021
1 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 24 day(s)
28970/20
30/06/2020
George ÅžTEFÄ‚NUÅ¢I
1980
Gherla Prison
23/12/2019 to
November 2022
More than 2 year(s)
30670/20
20/04/2021
Vlad PAPAZUL
1976
Rahova, Giurgiu, Jilava, Timișoara and Poarta Albă Prisons
27/05/2019 to
07/04/2022
3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 10 day(s)
38537/20
29/09/2020
Cristache DRÄ‚GAN
1997
Craiova Prison
20/12/2019 to
August 2022
More than 2 year(s)
46492/20
03/11/2020
Ladislau DOMBORA
1949
Covasna Police Station and Codlea, Rahova - Bucharest, Miercurea-Ciuc, Mărgineni, Bârcea-Mare, Pelendava, Mioveni Prisons
04/11/2008 to
June 2023
More than 14 year(s)
© European Union,
https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026
