CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 16 octobre 2025

.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 } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s7FB0030E { width:111.07pt; 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 } .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 } .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 }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 25191/21 Cosmin-Mihai DAN against Romania and 15 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 16   October 2025 as a Committee composed of:   Anne Louise Bormann , President ,   Sebastian Răduleţu,   András Jakab , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants and the relevant details are set out in the appendix. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law, were communicated to the Romanian Government, who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations (see the appended table for the relevant dates). No reply was received by the Court. By letters sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the time allowed for the submission of their observations had expired (see the appended table for the relevant dates). The applicants’ attention was further drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. No reply to these letters has been received by the Court. The registered letters were either received by the applicants or the applicants’ relatives or were returned to the Court (see details in the appended table). 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. In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the applications (Article 37 §   1   (a) of the Convention). Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in   fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto which require 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. Done in English and notified in writing on 13 November 2025.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Anne Louise Bormann   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 Year of birth Representative’s name and location Date of the applicant’s last letter to the Court Date of sending Government’s observations to the applicant Time-limit for submission of response by the applicant Date of the Court’s registered letter Date of receipt/return of the registered letter     25191/21 16/04/2021 Cosmin-Mihai DAN 1998       14/06/2021 26/03/2025 07/05/2025 04/06/2025 Received by the applicant on 18/06/2025     37839/21 20/08/2021 Marian OSIAC 1976       09/04/2025 04/09/2024 16/10/2024 30/04/2025 Received by the prison’s official on 22/05/2025     58319/21 14/10/2021 Silviu-Geroge PEIU 1986       27/10/2021 26/03/2025 07/05/2025 04/06/2025 Returned on 22/07/2025 by Botoșani prison after unsuccessful attempt to send the letter at the applicant’s domicile following the latter’s release.     21478/22 23/05/2022 Emil-Nicolae SZATMARI 1986       02/06/2022 18/03/2024 29/04/2025 22/05/2025 Returned on 11/07/2025 by the Romanian Post as recipient unknown.     21540/22 02/06/2022 Valentin-Marian CHIRILĂ 1989       05/08/2022 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Received by the applicant on 18/06/2025     25501/22 06/09/2022 Dănuţ ŢICHELEA 1974       02/11/2022 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Returned on 04/07/2025 by the Romanian Post as recipient unknown.     28688/22 18/07/2022 Gheorghe HRIŢCU 1958       29/06/2023 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Returned on 17/07/2025 by the Romanian Post as unclaimed.     30609/22 10/11/2022 Ilie-Aurel FAUR 1974     04/04/2024 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Received by the applicant on 19/06/2025     32073/22 24/08/2022 Viorel-Ionel RUSU 1991       01/09/2022 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Returned on 08/08/2025 by Vaslui prison after unsuccessful attempt to send the letter at the applicant’s domicile following the latter’s release.   41872/22 22/08/2022 Yosef Shmuel MALKA 1963       30/08/2022 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Returned on 06/08/2025 by Jilava prison after unsuccessful attempt to send the letter at the applicant’s domicile following the latter’s release.     43236/22 29/08/2022 Alin-Constantin PARASCA 1991       06/01/2023 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Received by the applicant on 19/06/2025   45803/22 03/03/2023 Mihai-Adrian MEREŞAN 1994   Ursei Francisc Caransebes 15/03/2023 18/03/2024 29/04/2025 06/06/2025 Returned on 22/07/2025 by the Romanian Post as unclaimed   51726/22 28/11/2022 Dumitru PARASCHIV 1974       09/02/2023 18/03/2024 29/04/2025 06/06/2025 Returned on 04/07/2025 by the Romanian Post as unknown   54245/22 19/01/2023 Cristi-Marian POPESCU 1988       05/02/2025 03/03/2025 14/04/2025 02/06/2025 Received on 18/06/2025, illegible signature   55841/22 30/12/2022 Claudiu-Felix MARTOCSAN 1996       21/02/2023 18/03/2024 29/04/2025 22/05/2025 Received on 12/06/2025, illegible signature   56785/22 20/01/2023 Nicuşor TARĂU 1987       26/01/2023 18/03/2024 29/04/2025 06/06/2025 Returned on 30/07/2025 by Brăila prison after unsuccessful attempt to send the letter at the applicant’s domicile following the latter’s release.