CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 3 avril 2025

.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 } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .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 } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .sD11CFAB7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sD58C010 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:15.01pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial } .sBB6E85D0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:34pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sE55E11EC { width:137.42pt; 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 } .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 }   FIFTH SECTION CASE OF SKOROKHOD AND OTHERS v. UKRAINE (Applications nos. 230/24 and 10 others – see appended list)             JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 3 April 2025   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Skorokhod and Others v. Ukraine, The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Diana Sârcu , President ,   Kateřina Šimáčková,   Mykola Gnatovskyy , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 13 March 2025, Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date: PROCEDURE 1.     The case originated in applications against Ukraine 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.     The Ukrainian Government (“the   Government”) were given notice of the applications. THE FACTS 3.     The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table. 4.     The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law. 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. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES   3 AND   13 OF THE CONVENTION 6.     The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Articles   3 and   13 of the Convention. 7.     The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case ‑ law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v.   Croatia [GC], no.   7334/13, §§   96 ‑ 101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” from the point of view of Article   3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić , cited above, §§   122-41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos.   42525/07 and 60800/08, §§   149 ‑ 59, 10   January 2012). 8.     The Court also refers to its standard of proof and methods for assessment of evidence in conditions-of-detention cases (see Muršić , cited above, §§ 127-28). In particular, in reply to a prima facie case of ill-treatment, complained of by the applicants, the Government is expected to provide primary evidence showing cell floor plans and the actual number of inmates during the specific periods of the applicants’ detention (see Ananyev and Others , cited above, § 123, and, for example, Sparysh and Kutsmand v.   Ukraine [Committee], nos. 49709/18 and 49870/18, 12 September 2024). Other documents and photographs, related to air, food, water quality control, pest control, temperature and luminosity measurements, bathing facilities, privacy of toilet, laundry services, etc., should pertain to cells and periods of the applicants’ detention. 9.     In the leading cases of Melnik v. Ukraine (no. 72286/01, 28 March 2006) and Sukachov v. Ukraine (no. 14057/17, 30 January 2020), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 10.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention during the periods indicated in the appended table were inadequate. 11.     The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy in respect of these complaints. 12.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention. OTHER ALLEGED VIOLATIONS UNDER WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE-LAW 13.     In applications nos.   9093/24, 12946/24, 12958/24 and 12976/24, the 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 cases set out in the appended table. REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     In application no.   12194/24, the applicant also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention. 15.     The Court has examined these 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, these complaints 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 the application must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §   4 of the Convention. 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, Sukachov , cited above, §§ 165 and 167), 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; Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention during the periods indicated in the appended table, the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in that regard and the other complaints under the well-established case-law of the Court, as set out in the appended table, admissible, and the remainder of application no.   12194/24 inadmissible; Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles   3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention during the periods specified in the appended table and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in that regard; 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 3 April 2025, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Sârcu   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of 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 Facility Start and end date Duration Sq. m per inmate Specific grievances Other complaints under well-established case-law Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros) [1] Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [2]     230/24 12/12/2023 Oleksandr Vasylyovych SKOROKHOD 1979   Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych Dnipro Kryvyi Rih Detention Facility no.3 13/10/2023 to 26/02/2024 4 month(s) and 14 day(s) 3.8 m² overcrowding, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   2,400 -     231/24 12/12/2023 Vasyl Mykolayovych GRYTSAY 1981   Rybiy Sergiy Mykolayovych Dnipro Kryvyi Rih Detention Facility no.3 08/09/2023 to 26/02/2024 5 month(s) and 19 day(s) 3.8 m² overcrowding, poor quality of food, passive smoking, no or restricted access to warm water, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of toiletries, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of fresh air   2,600 -     7955/24 04/03/2024 Rostyslav Vitaliyovych DZEKUN 1989   Pustyntsev Andriy Vitaliyovych Dnipro Poltava Detention Facility no. 23 27/05/2022 pending More than 2 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 1 day(s)     2.7 m² overcrowding, passive smoking, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of toiletries, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents   6,400 -     8283/24 01/03/2024 Ivan Ivanovych MUSHYK 1994   Yolkin Andriy Valeriyovych Kryvyy Rig Kropyvnytsky Pre-Trial Detention Facility 05/04/2023 to 02/11/2023 6 month(s) and 29 day(s)                   Kropyvnytsky Pre-Trial Detention Facility 26/12/2023 to 15/03/2024 2 month(s) and 19 day(s) 2-3.5 m²                                 2-3.5 m² overcrowding, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient electric light, no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of requisite medical assistance   overcrowding, poor quality of food, passive smoking, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to running water, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of toiletries, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature, lack of requisite medical assistance         3,100 -     9093/24 14/03/2024 Yevgen Volodymyrovych PLYS 1979   Telychenko Valentyna Vasylivna Kyiv Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4. 09/04/2021 to 15/11/2023 2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 7 day(s) < 3 m² overcrowding, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, lack of fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - 30/03/2021 - 11/04/2024, fragility and repetitiveness of the reasoning employed by the courts as the case progressed (see Kharchenko v. Ukraine , no. 40107/02, §§ 77-81, 10 February 2011, Ignatov v. Ukraine , 40583/15, §§ 38-42, 15 December 2016) 7,900 250     12194/24 05/04/2024 Vitaliy Igorovych TYUTYAYEV 1987   Pustyntsev Andriy Vitaliyovych Dnipro Kropyvnytskyy Pre-Trial Detention Facility 21/09/2023 to 20/03/2024 6 month(s) 3.3 m² overcrowding, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to shower   1,700 -     12946/24 02/05/2024 Oleksandr Oleksandrovych ADAMOVYCH 1970   Kulbach Sergiy Oleksandrovych Limoges Kyiv Pre-Trial Detention Facility 07/10/2022 pending More than 2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 21 day(s) 2.1-2.9 m² overcrowding, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings - 07/10/2022 - pending, 1 level of jurisdiction (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021 and (see Adamovych v. Ukraine [Committee], nos. 2564/21 and 15553/21, 6 October 2022, for factual details describing the proceedings in which the same applicant was involved); Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021). 7,300 -     12958/24 02/05/2024 Roman Igorovych MISHENIN 1984   Kulbach Sergiy Oleksandrovych Limoges Kyiv Pre-Trial Detention Facility 11/02/2022 to 11/11/2024 2 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 1 day(s) 2.4-3 m² overcrowding, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings - 11/02/2022 - pending, 1 level of jurisdiction (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021 and Kononov and Others v. Ukraine [Committee], nos. 39108/18 and 3 others, 10 February 2022, for further details related to the initial part of the criminal proceedings against the applicant);   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021)         8,300 -     12976/24 02/05/2024 Roman Vasylyovych KRAKOVSKYY 1984   Kushnir Valeriy Volodymyrovych Dnipro Kharkiv Pre-Trial Detention Facility 17/06/2021 to 17/04/2024 2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 1 day(s)     Kharkiv Pre-Trial Detention Facility 15/05/2024 to 06/11/2024 5 month(s) and 23 day(s) 2.5-4.2 m²                   2.5-4.2 m² overcrowding, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food   overcrowding, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food Art. 5 (3) - excessive length of pre-trial detention - 15/06/2021 - pending, collective detention orders, fragility and repetitiveness of the reasoning employed by the courts as the case progressed (see Kharchenko v. Ukraine , no. 40107/02, §§ 77-81, 10 February 2011, Ignatov v. Ukraine , 40583/15, §§ 38-42, 15 December 2016);   Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings - 11/06/2021 - pending, 1 level of jurisdiction (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021);   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings – (see Nechay v. Ukraine , no. 15360/10, §§ 67-79, 1 July 2021)           9,500 250   14585/24 15/05/2024 Tetyana Petrivna DOTSENKO 1976   Sosyedko Maksym Oleksandrovych Kyiv Dnipro Detention Facility no. 4 12/03/2021 to 25/03/2024 3 year(s) and 14 day(s) 2.5-3.5 m² overcrowding, passive smoking, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to shower, lack of toiletries, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, lack of or insufficient electric light   6,800 -   22659/24 01/08/2024 Myron Mykolayovych LAKATOSH 1998   Kanivets Oleksandr Petrovych Uzhgorod Zakarpattia Detention Facility 08/04/2020 to 02/04/2024 3 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 26 day(s) 2.6 m² overcrowding, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of fresh air, poor quality of potable water, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient quantity of food   7,500 -     [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants. [2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.