CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 15 février 2018

.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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s80E2F039 { width:6.54pt; display:inline-block } .s59B01AF0 { width:192.42pt; display:inline-block } .s5B081A9D { width:168.28pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .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 } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 14821/16 Viktor Valeryevich SELIVANOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 15   February 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Luis López Guerra, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 December 2015, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Viktor Valeryevich Selivanov, was born in Maykop. He was represented by Mr A. Kiryanov, a lawyer practising in Taganrog. The applicant’s complaints under Article   3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention during transport were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the complaint raised by the applicant under Article 3 of the Convention about poor conditions of his transport was submitted belatedly. In particular, the Court notes that the applicant complained of the period of his transport which ended on 20 October 2013. At the same time, he only lodged his application with the Court on 17 December 2015. Therefore, and in the absence of effective domestic remedies for such complaints (see Idalov v. Russia (no. 2) , no. 41858/08, §§ 113-115, 13 December 2016), the application, which should have been lodged within six months after the end of the period of transport in those conditions, was lodged belatedly. It follows that it does not comply with the six-month rule set out in Article   35   § 1 of the Convention, and must be rejected pursuant to Article   35 § 4. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Declares the application inadmissible.   Done in English and notified in writing on 8 March 2018.   Liv Tigerstedt   Luis López Guerra Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant name Date of birth   Means of transport Start and end date Sq. m per inmate Specific grievances     14821/16 17/12/2015 Viktor Valeryevich Selivanov 22/08/1975 van 01/10/2013 to 20/10/2013 0.325 m²     overcrowding