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 } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .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 } .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 } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 29658/18 Aleksandr Sergeyevich ZVEREV against Russia and 9 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 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial 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 excessive length of pre-trial 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. 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. 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. 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   5   §   3 of the Convention (excessive length of pre-trial 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]     29658/18 07/06/2018 Aleksandr Sergeyevich ZVEREV 12/03/1997       03/07/2019 06/09/2019 2,600     35823/18 14/07/2018 Shamkhan Khuseynovich ABUYEV 11/06/1988 Bagdasaryan Innara Zhorayevna Moscow   29/05/2019 19/09/2019 3,200     40511/18 15/08/2018 Dmitriy Gennadyevich VINOGRADOV 12/12/1980 Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich Syktyvkar   15/07/2019 30/08/2019 3,500     47350/18 21/09/2018 Boris Vladimirovich KUNITSYN 27/06/1989 Andreyev Ashot Aleksandrovich Syktyvkar   03/07/2019 02/09/2019 3,500     48010/18 24/09/2018 Nikolay Mikhaylovich KALININ 16/12/1981       03/07/2019 10/09/2019 2,300     54735/18 14/12/2018 Dmitriy Sergeyevich ATLASOV 20/11/1987     Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - appeal against detention order of 26/07/2018 was examined only on 21/08/2018. 03/07/2019 02/09/2019 1,500     59180/18 21/11/2018 Natalya Lvovna ZUBOVA 30/12/1958 Yezerskiy Aleksey Vladimirovich Samara   29/05/2019 23/08/2019 4,550     1500/19 10/12/2018 Ramil Mukhammetovich SAFIN 14/02/1979 Burlachenko Sergey Nikolayevich Moscow Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention - detention in IZ ‑ 77/4 Moscow since 23/03/2018; insufficient number of sleeping places, overcrowding. 03/07/2019 02/09/2019 5,700     6024/19 14/01/2019 Igor Anatolyevich KHRAMUSHIN 27/05/1970 Andreyev Denis Aleksandrovich Samara   15/07/2019 18/09/2019 5,000   6697/19 16/01/2019 Vladimir Dmitriyevich ANDREYEV 04/08/1954     Art. 5 (4) - excessive length of judicial review of detention - appeal against the detention order of 18/07/2018 was examined only on 17/08/2018;   Art. 3 - use of metal cages and/or other security arrangements in courtrooms - detention in a metal cage during the hearings before the Tsentralniy District Court of Tula, Proletarskiy District Court of Tula and Tule Regional Court (by way of videoconference) - the most recent occasion on 05/12/2018. 26/07/2019 06/09/2019 2,300   [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.