CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 mars 2020

.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 } .sF2EF8B01 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s9E6BC58A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; font-size:7pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s94C6321B { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s66E9FC38 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .s6E03D265 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sD7AA71C8 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .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 } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sF00A2B95 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super } .sB343B0AA { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt }   THIRD SECTION DECISION This version was rectified on 5 March 2026 under Rule 81 of the Rules of Court. Application no. 11582/17 Igor Vasilyevich SADKOV against Russia and 13 other applications (see appended table)   The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5   March 2020 as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Gilberto Felici, 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 other provisions of the Convention. The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications. The Government 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 other provisions 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. On 11 February 2019 Ms Galina Filkova, the applicant’s mother (application no. 69403/17), informed the Court that the applicant had died on 22 January 2019. She expressed a wish to pursue the application in her capacity of the applicant’s heir. [1] 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 declarations 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 (see appended table), as covered by the unilateral declarations of the Government. Locus standi , as regards application no.   69403/17 The Court takes note of Mr Filkov’s death and of the wish of his mother, Ms   Filkova, to pursue the application on his behalf. It accepts that Ms   Filkova has standing to pursue the proceedings in her son’s stead [2] . The applicants in applications nos. 11582/17, 69403/17, 22426/18 and 23755/18 also raised complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention during different periods of detention. The Court has examined those complaints and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, they either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles   34 and   35 of the Convention or do 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 applications nos. 11582/17, 69403/17, 22426/18 and 23755/18 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 (see appended table), as covered by the Government’s declarations; Declares the remainder of applications nos. 11582/17, 69403/17, 22426/18, and 23755/18 inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 26 March 2020.   Liv Tigerstedt   Alena Poláčková   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 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]     11582/17 29/01/2017 Igor Vasilyevich SADKOV 06/02/1978 Stasyuk Olga Andreyevna St Petersburg Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 09/09/2019 07/11/2019 6,250     52786/17 07/11/2017 Andrey Pavlovich VELIKANOV 11/07/1990     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 16/07/2018 12/11/2018 2,460     69403/17 03/09/2017 Aleksey Viktorovich FILKOV 24/04/1981   Heir Galina Yeliseyevna FILKOVA 23/08/1959 [2]       03/04/2018 29/05/2018 4,650     77180/17 25/06/2018 Yakov Vitalyevich BOGDANOV 16/06/1997     Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 18/02/2019 24/04/2019 6,975     79673/17 10/11/2017 Aleksandr Ivanovich ISAYEV 26/01/1963 Kuleba Aleksandr Petrovich St Petersburg   15/01/2019 26/03/2019 8,000     9671/18 06/02/2018 Dmitriy Aleksandrovich TYDNYUK 23/04/1987 Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich Tyumen Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - The applicant was placed in metal cages in Khanty-Mansiysky District Court of Khanty-Mansiysky Region from 24/12/2014 to 17/08/2017 12/03/2019 18/04/2019 11,993     12296/18 06/02/2018 Aleksandr Yuryevich ANTONOV 20/08/1988       12/03/2019 18/04/2019 5,175     18078/18 05/03/2018 Konstantin Viktorovich VORONOV 28/12/1983 Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich Tyumen   12/03/2019 18/04/2019 8,100     22426/18 20/04/2018 Aleksandr Gennadyevich SMIRNOV 10/06/1981       30/10/2018 25/01/2019 2,260   23755/18 09/04/2018 Ilgiz Ravilevich SADYKOV 01/05/1989       30/10/2018 06/02/2019 1,895   23760/18 20/04/2018 Efren Gebregivorgis ABREKHAM 11/05/1994       30/10/2018 06/02/2019 3,620   26300/18 29/05/2018 Andrey Nikolayevich KALUGIN 16/04/1960 Lobanova Olga Viktorovna St Petersbourg   10/01/2019 27/03/2019 8,750   30384/18 14/06/2018 Igor Sergeyevich KNYAZEV 31/01/1992 Vtorushin Nikolay Aleksandrovich Tyumen Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - placement in metal cages at pre-trial and trial hearings before the Tsentralnyy District Court of Tyumen until the conviction on 04/12/2017. 12/03/2019 18/04/2019 4,147   30590/18 01/06/2018 Andrey Aleksandrovich GREBENNIKOV 10/03/1976       25/01/2019 10/05/2019 3,528   [1] Rectified on 5 March 2026: the entire paragraph was added. [2] Rectified on 5 March 2026: the entire paragraph was added. [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. [2] Rectified on 5 March 2026: the details concerning the heir were added.