CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 22 octobre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5E698226 { width:12.01pt; display:inline-block } .sDB6B63EE { width:176.94pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s529BF6EF { page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .sEDC5336B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 51865/07 Vera Alekseyevna TEREKHINA (ANANYEVA) against Russia and 6 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 22   October 2013 as a Committee composed of:   Khanlar Hajiyev, President,   Erik Møse,   Dmitry Dedov, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates listed in the appendix, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the Government and the applicants’ acceptance of their terms, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. 2.     The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. 3.     The applicants complained, in particular, about the conditions of their detention in Russian penitentiary facilities. 4.     By their letters dated 5 December 2012, 19 March and 3 June 2013, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the applications. They acknowledged that the applicants had been “detained in the conditions which did not comply with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention”, and in Mr Khurtov’s case, also that the applicant “was detained in violation of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention”, and stated their readiness to pay the following amounts to the applicants as just satisfaction: 9,000 euros (EUR) to Ms Terekhina (Ananyeva), EUR   15,780 to Mr   Khurtov, EUR 5,250 to Mr Chirzha, EUR 3,700 to Mr   Khristoforov, EUR 4,285 to Mr Akbatyrov, EUR 4,805 to Mr   Chesnokov, and EUR   10,000 to Mr Arshinov. The payment was to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, together with any costs and expenses incurred, as well as any tax that may be chargeable. It would be effected within a period of three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay within that period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment would constitute the final resolution of the cases. 5.     In their letters of various dates, the applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the Government’s declarations. THE LAW 6.     Having regard to the similarity of the main issues under the Convention in the above cases, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision. 7.     The Court considers that the applicants’ agreement to the terms of the declarations made by the Government shall be considered as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Cēsnieks v. Latvia (dec.), no.   9278/06,   §   34, 6 March 2012, and Bakal and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no.   8243/08, 5   June 2012). 8.     The Court therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. 9.     In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications, Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   André Wampach   Khanlar Hajiyev   Deputy Registrar   President   Appendix   No Application No Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   51865/07 28/10/2007 Vera Alekseyevna TEREKHINA (ANANYEVA) 18/05/1986 Astrakhan       2335/10 29/12/2009 Sergey Spartakovich KHURTOV 14/07/1959 Volgograd   Anton Aleksandrovich KOPYLOV   25051/10 16/04/2010 Aleksandr Anatolyevich CHIRZHA 28/01/1973 Lesnoy       44366/10 05/07/2010 Nikolay Anatolyevich KHRISTOFOROV 19/12/1981 Asanovskiy Sovkhoz Tekhnikum       15280/11 28/01/2011 Denis Aleksandrovich AKBATYROV 08/03/1982 Kushmangort       32186/11 04/04/2011 Aleksandr Yureyvich CHESNOKOV 16/03/1984 Tyumen       7257/13 12/04/2010 Dmitriy Vladimirovich ARSHINOV 07/01/1976 Balakhna