CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 6 juin 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .sDECD9755 { margin-left:11.67pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:6.78pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sDA7B489D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:3.45pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s5C5C410E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:0.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s67CAFE05 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:18.45pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s7C22C014 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:16.34pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:2.11pt; font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s74818F78 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; list-style-position:inside } .sE7B3A78A { width:1.99pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s51DFF5CF { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify } .sE5BF05B1 { width:2.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sF5B27E79 { width:130.75pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .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 } .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 } .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 } .s3A357E38 { text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .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 }       FIRST SECTION CASE OF KIRILLOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 11439/21 and 23 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 6 June 2024   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kirillov and Others v. Russia, The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Lətif Hüseynov , President ,   Ivana Jelić,   Erik Wennerström , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 16 May 2024, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article   34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table. 2.     Notice of the applications was given to the Russian Government (“the Government”). THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants alleged that they did not receive adequate medical care in detention and that there was no effective remedy in that regard. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention. THE LAW JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 5.     Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. Jurisdiction 6.     The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violations of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§   68 ‑ 73, 17 January 2023). ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION 7.     The applicants complained principally that they were not afforded adequate medical treatment in detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention. 8.     The Court notes that the applicants suffered from serious medical conditions, as indicated in the appended table, which affected their everyday functioning. Therefore, they could have experienced considerable anxiety as to whether the medical care provided to them was adequate. 9.     The Court reiterates that the “adequacy” of medical assistance remains the most difficult element to determine (see Blokhin v.   Russia [GC], no.   47152/06, §   137, ECHR 2016). It has clarified in this context that the authorities must ensure that diagnosis and care are prompt and accurate (see, for example,   Gorbulya v.   Russia , no.   31535/09, § 62, 6   March 2014, with further references, and Pokhlebin v.   Ukraine , no.   35581/06, § 62, 20 May 2010, with further references) and that ‒ where necessitated by the nature of a medical condition ‒ supervision is regular and systematic and involves a comprehensive therapeutic strategy aimed at successfully treating the detainee’s health problems or preventing their aggravation (see, inter alia , Ukhan v.   Ukraine , no. 30628/02, § 74, 18 December 2008, with further references, and Kolesnikovich v.   Russia , no.   44694/13, §   70, 22   March 2016, with further references). The Court stresses that medical treatment within prison facilities must be appropriate and comparable to the quality of treatment which the State authorities have committed themselves to providing for the entirety of the population. Nevertheless, this does not mean that each detainee must be guaranteed the same level of medical treatment that is available in the best health establishments outside prison facilities (see, for instance, Sadretdinov v.   Russia , no.   17564/06, §   67, 24   May 2016, with further references, and Konovalchuk v. Ukraine , no.   31928/15, § 52, 13   October 2016, with further references). 10.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has identified the shortcomings in the applicants’ medical treatment, which are listed in the appended table. The Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see Blokhin v. Russia [GC], no. 47152/06, §§ 120-50, ECHR 2016, Reshetnyak v. Russia, no.   56027/10, §§ 49-101, 8 January 2013, and Koryak v. Russia, no.   24677/10, §§ 70-110, 13 November 2012). Bearing in mind its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants did not receive comprehensive and adequate medical care whilst in detention. 11.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION 12.     The applicants also complained that no effective domestic remedies regarding the quality of the medical care in detention were available to them. Their complaints fall to be examined under Article   13 of the Convention. 13.     The Court has on many occasions established that there is a lack of effective domestic remedies to complain about the quality of medical treatment in detention (see, among many other authorities, Reshetnyak , cited above, §§ 49-101, and Koryak, also cited above, §§ 70-110). In the aforementioned cases the Court established that none of the legal avenues suggested by the Government constituted an effective remedy to prevent the alleged violations or stop them from continuing, or to provide the applicants with adequate and sufficient redress for their complaints under Article   3 of the Convention. 14.     The Court sees no reason which would justify departure from its well ‑ established case-law on the issue. It finds that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints, in breach of Article 13 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 15.     Some applicants submitted other complaints which also raised issues under the Convention, given the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill-founded within the meaning of Article   35   §   3   (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Lyapin v. Russia , no. 46956/09, 24 July 2014, as regards ill-treatment suffered at the hands of the police ; Topekhin v. Russia , no. 78774/13, §§ ‑ 78 ‑ 88, 10 May 2016, relating to conditions of detention of disabled inmates; and Tomov and Others v. Russia , nos.   18255/10 and 5 others, §§   92 ‑ 156, 9   April 2019, concerning conditions of detention during transport and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 16.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Kolesnikovich v. Russia, no. 44694/13, §§ 82-92, 22 March 2016, Tselovalnik v. Russia, no. 28333/13, §§ 70-77, 8 October 2015 and Budanov v. Russia, no. 66583/11, §§ 77-83, 9 January 2014), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY, Decides to join the applications; Holds that it has jurisdiction to deal with these applications as they relate to facts that took place before 16   September 2022; Declares the applications admissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention on account of the inadequate medical care in detention; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article   13 of the Convention on account of the lack of an effective domestic remedy regarding complaints about the quality of the medical care in detention; Holds that there has been a violation of the Convention as regards the other complaints raised under the well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table); Holds (a)   that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement; (b)   that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 6 June 2024, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Lətif Hüseynov   Acting Deputy Registrar   President     APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 and Article 13 of the Convention (inadequate medical treatment in detention and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Principal medical condition Shortcomings in medical treatment Dates Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     11439/21 01/02/2021 Aleksey Nikolayevich KIRILLOV 1976     lack of teeth, gastritis, amputated foot lacking/delayed diet, failure to provide the applicant with fresh feet prosthesis (2 items), lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 16/08/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 4 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 1   day(s) Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention during transport - from 23/11/2020 to 08/12/2020, van, train, from IK-8 (Ukhta) to SIZO-1 (Syktyvkar) (about 300 km, 10   hours by train): 0.3 sq. m of personal space per detainee, bunk beds, deterioration in conditions of detention (cumulative effect of lack of physical exercise, breaches of the hygiene regulations, lack of contact with the outside world and uncertainty), inadequate temperature, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to toilet, overcrowding, the applicant is a disabled person - no facilities for disabled persons, no facilities to ensure safety of passengers, no special food provided required in view of the applicant’s condition,   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention during transport,   Art. 3 - inadequate conditions of detention of disabled inmates - The applicant was detained and possible continues to be held as of 16/09/2022 in the detention conditions which are not suited for disabled detainees (toilets, bathing facilities), failure to provide him with special shoes suitable for feet prosthesis, lack of regular and systematic supervision of the applicant’s state of health between 16/08/2018 and 24/09/2021 during his detention in IK-8 (Komi Republic) 19,500     19877/21 21/10/2020 Todzhidin Kudratovich KHAYDAROV 1980     cyst of left testicle lack of/ delay in surgery, cyst of the left testicle   from 25/05/2021 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 23   day(s)   15,000     20618/21 21/03/2021 Sergey Anatolyevich FEDENEV 1980 Laptev Aleksey Nikolayevich Moscow retinal dystrophy and disinsertion of both eyes lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing, delay in ophthalmological surgery leading to blindness   from 21/02/2014 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 8 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 27   day(s)   15,000     25465/21 30/04/2021 Aleksandr Vitalyevich ZUBAREV 1979 Protasov Vladimir Yuryevich Yoshkar - Ola chronic osteomyelitis of the sternum, encephalopathy, other illnesses: HIV (III), hepatitis, hernia, peptic ulcer, meniscectomy, catarrhal esophagitis delayed surgery (since 2018), lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 03/12/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 3 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 14   day(s)   15,000     33612/21 05/03/2021 Vyacheslav Ivanovich TRIKOZ 1986     hepatitis   lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy   21/01/2015 to 07/05/2018 3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 17   day(s)   The domestic courts acknowledged the delayed testing and lack of drug therapy and awarded the applicant RUB 10,000; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 21/07/2021   15,000     38023/21 07/07/2021 Idris Anzurovich MEZHIDOV 1990 Kopteyeva Anastasiya Vladimirovna Chita tuberculosis lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in medical examination   01/10/2013 to 28/03/2018 4 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 28   day(s)   Compensation was granted to the applicant for shortcomings in treatment in the amount of RUB   20,000; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 28/01/2021   15,000     42885/21 07/12/2021 Dmitriy Failovich RAIMOV 1985     osteomyelitis of the upper jaw on the right (in the area of 11-15 teeth) lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, delay in conducting surgery   from 01/11/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 3 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 16   day(s)   The applicant lodged a civil claim for compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by poor quality of medical assistance in detention and the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Murmansk confirmed inadequate medical treatment and awarded the applicant RUB 100,000 of non ‑ pecuniary damage, upheld by the Third Cassation Court on 21/06/2021     15,000     46273/21 05/07/2021 Ruslan Alekseyevich KUZIVANOV 1982     hepatitis, HIV/AIDS lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing   22/10/2016 to 30/05/2019 2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 9   day(s)   The applicant claimed compensation before the domestic courts for poor medical assistance and was awarded RUB   15,000, Supreme Court of the Komi Republic, 17/05/2021   15,000     48816/21 25/01/2022 Anton Aleksandrovich VAKHRUSHEV 1995     HIV/AIDS lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing   19/03/2021 to 20/01/2022 10 month(s) and 2 day(s)   15,000   52092/21 01/10/2021 Aleksandr Vasilyevich TURYEV 1966     urogenital system diseases lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing, failure to conduct a surgery, shortcomings in medical treatment led to loss of a kidney   26/09/2014 to 21/09/2018 3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 27 day(s)   The applicant was awarded RUB 700,000 on account of poor medical help; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 30/08/2021   8,000   56942/21 17/01/2022 Yevgeniy Vitalyevich SIMUSEV 1981     HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C lack of/delay in medical examination, lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in medical testing   from 30/03/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 4 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 18 day(s)   15,000   58071/21 08/11/2021 Ruslan Rafailovich BAGAUTDINOV 1986     hepatitis C lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing, lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist   from 01/01/2013 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 9 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 16 day(s)   The applicant initiated civil proceedings against detention authorities seeking compensation for their failure to provide the necessary medical care. On 18/05/2021 the domestic courts ruled in favour of the applicant, found shortcomings in medical treatment and awarded him RUB 40,000 (upheld on appeal, 19/08/2021, Supreme Court of the Komi Republic); final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 20/04/2022   15,000   59472/21 17/11/2021 Vladislav Vitalyevich MOCHALOV 1997     unfused fracture of clavicle lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, lack of/delay in medical examination   from 21/09/2020 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 27 day(s)   15,000   59541/21 13/11/2021 Anatoliy Yuryevich MEDNIKOV 1983     bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (4 stage - right ear; 3 stage - left ear) lacking/delayed drug therapy, no hearing aid was provided   from 27/10/2016 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 5 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 21 day(s)   15,000   61009/21 01/11/2021 Oleg Igorevich GONOSHILOV 1968     trophic ulcer after amputation, atherosclerosis, hepatitis C lack of/delay in medical examination, lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 13/09/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 4 year(s) and 4 day(s)           15,000   147/22 13/12/2021 Yuriy Viktorovich ANTONETS 1981     consequences of spinal fracture lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, lack of/delay in medical examination, lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 18/09/2018 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 30 day(s)   15,000   8889/22 19/01/2022 Vladimir Nikolayevich SHILOV 1970     hepatitis C lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in medical examination   from 08/10/2016 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 5 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 9 day(s)   15,000   10012/22 31/01/2022 Pavel Igorevich GOMASKO 1985     HIV/AIDS,   stage 3 lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, in particular, an infectious disease physician, lacking/delayed drug therapy   09/03/2013 to 15/07/2016 3 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 7 day(s)   The applicant lodged a civil claim for compensation. On 27/05/2020 the Sovetskiy District Court of Novosibirsk found that the applicant did not receive the necessary treatment and awarded him RUB   40,000, upheld by the Supreme Court of Russia on 05/08/2021   15,000   14051/22 07/02/2022 Sergey Aleksandrovich PLESHEV 1991     hepatitis lack of/delay in medical examination, lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 01/03/2017 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 5 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 16 day(s)   15,000   20556/22 19/12/2021 Aleksandr Vladimirovich KHLEBNIKOV 1967     lack of teeth lack of/delay in medical treatment   from 04/02/2011 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 11 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 13 day(s)   15,000   22763/22 21/03/2022 Leonid Sergeyevich LEBEDEV 1979     heart condition, congenital heart disease, bicuspid aortic valve lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist, lack of/delay in medical examination   from 23/01/2020 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 25 day(s)   15,000   33267/22 17/06/2022 Sergey Borisovich NEKLYAYEV 1962 Valiyeva Elza Albertovna Nizhniy Novgorod physical injury lack of/delay in medical examination, the ambulance was not allowed to attend to the applicant, no x-ray of his broken right arm was performed following the applicant’s ill ‑ treatment   06/05/2020 to 12/05/2020 7 day(s)   The applicant’s claim for non-pecuniary damage under the CAP was dismissed; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 25/02/2022 Art. 3 – ill-treatment by State agents and absence of effective investigation into the events in question - At around 5.50 p.m. on 05/05/2020 police officers of Police Department no. 5 in Nizhniy Novgorod ill-treated the applicant. The applicant was arrested on the ground that he did not have a QR-code necessary to leave home during COVID epidemy. He refused to get into a police van and was pushed down to the ground. The police officers put handcuffs on him, lifted him up and forced him to the van. Several refusals to initiate criminal proceedings were issued on the applicant’s complaints of ill-treatment. On 16/08/2022 the Sovetskiy District Court of Nizhniy Novgorod terminated the proceedings because the most recent refusal to open a criminal case of 17/02/2022 had already been quashed. Forensic medical examination log no. 872, record made on 06/05/2020 confirm that the applicant had a swollen elbow joint of the right arm, and the bruised right eye, medical certificate of 13/05/2020 showed that he had broken right elbow. 26,000   37193/22 21/07/2022 Gogita Anzorovich GVISHIANI 1967 Kopteyeva Anastasiya Vladimirovna Chita HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, chronic obstructive lung disease lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy, lack of/delay in consultation by a specialist   09/02/2015 to 07/11/2019 4 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 30 day(s)   The applicant lodged a civil claim asking for compensation for damages caused by the lack of medical services in detention. The courts acknowledged the violation regarding the period between 09/02/2015 and 07/11/2019. The applicant was awarded RUB 60,000; final decision: Supreme Court of Russia, 21/01/2022   15,000   4787/23 09/01/2023 Vladimir Vladimirovich YAKUSHEV 1979     hypertensive heart disease, chronic hepatitis   C lack of/delay in medical testing, lacking/delayed drug therapy   from 06/02/2017 and possibly ongoing as of 16/09/2022 5 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 11 day(s)   15,000     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.