CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 4 avril 2019

.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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .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 } .s98AB28CD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:left; 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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sEEEC397 { width:146.09pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s7FDD75C9 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.2pt; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; 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 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 16696/17 Fedor Sergeyevich YEGOROV against Russia and 15 other applications (see appended table)   The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 4 April 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations, 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 Russian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under Article 13 of the Convention. The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They acknowledged the inadequate conditions of detention. In some of the applications, they further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by Article 13 of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the 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 will constitute the final resolution of the cases. The applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations. 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. The Court finds that, following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the cases should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties. It 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 the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list as regards the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law, as specified in the unilateral declarations. The applicant in application no. 6723/18 also raised another complaint about the conditions of his detention during a separate period. The Court has examined the complaint and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matter complained of is within its competence, this complaint either does not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles   34 and   35 of the Convention or does not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto. It follows that this part of the application no. 6723/18 must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §   4 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 as regards the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the other complaints under the well-established case-law, as covered by the unilateral declarations; Declares the remainder of application no. 6723/18 inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 9 May 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Alena Poláčková   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Date of birth   Representative’s name and location Other complaints under well-established case-law   Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s acceptance Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     16696/17 17/04/2017 Fedor Sergeyevich Yegorov 21/12/1977     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 10/01/2018 23/02/2018 5,000     22214/17 28/02/2017 Denis Sergeyevich Bendin 26/05/1993       10/01/2018 09/05/2018 5,250     36331/17 10/05/2017 Elvin Aydyn ogly Nabiyev 02/08/1984       10/01/2018 23/02/2018 5,000     40348/17 18/05/2017 Artur Vladimirovich Trunov 15/02/1975       23/01/2018 21/03/2018 5,000     81916/17 21/11/2017 Tatyana Fedorovna Zinovyeva 01/01/1960 Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kostroma Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 22/05/2018 16/07/2018 4,500     82167/17 18/11/2017 Aleksey Vladimirovich Kazakov 01/03/1975       22/05/2018 27/06/2018 4,500     5353/18 21/12/2017 Marat Aleksandrovich Urazov 07/10/1993     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 23/07/2018 14/09/2018 4,725     6640/18 20/01/2018 Aleksey Nikolayevich Novoselov 26/03/1982 Korchuganova Natalya Vladimirovna Moscow   14/09/2018 14/11/2018 4,500     6723/18 11/01/2018 Aleksey Aleksandrovich Kuznetsov 04/08/1984 Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kostroma Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 16/10/2018 17/12/2018 4,500   9382/18 12/02/2018 Sergey Vladimirovich Korepanov 09/09/1981     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 04/10/2018 28/11/2018 2,460   11740/18 07/02/2018 Boris Valentinovich Voronkov 22/07/1962         09/10/2018 02/01/2019 4,500   13338/18 02/03/2018 Farrukh Fazlitdinovich Abduloyev 23/12/1984     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 04/10/2018 07/02/2019 4,500   14039/18 12/02/2018 Valeriy Nikolayevich Kolesnikov 21/04/1968       09/10/2018 03/12/2018 4,500   19917/18 10/04/2018 Farit Baglyulyevich Murzagitov 29/06/1963       31/10/2018 18/12/2018 4,500   20226/18 05/04/2018 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Lebedev 01/10/1979 Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kostroma Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 16/10/2018 17/12/2018 4,500   22346/18 10/04/2018 Dmitriy Vyacheslavovich Orlov 21/10/1988 Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kostroma Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention - 16/10/2018 17/12/2018 4,500   [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.