CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 20 novembre 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 } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6C5BED22 { margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s46DB5BA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; 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 } .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 } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; 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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 41824/17 Gheorghiță GUZGANU against Romania and 8 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 20   November 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 regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, 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 Romanian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Joinder of the applications Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention) Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that, for the reasons stated below, the present applications are inadmissible. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention. The Government argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust the available effective remedies for the complaints about the inadequate conditions of their detention, as the action in tort had become an effective remedy for grievances similar to those of the applicants, allowing them to have the violation of the Convention acknowledged, either explicitly or in substance, and to receive adequate and sufficient compensation at domestic level. The Government expressly referred to Vlad v. Romania (dec.), no.   122/17, 15 November 2022, either directly in their observations or by a subsequent letter and invited the Court to declare the cases inadmissible. The Court recalls that in Polgar v. Romania , no. 39412/19, §§   94-96, 20   July 2021, it held that an action in tort, based on Articles 1349 and 1357 of the Romanian Civil Code, as interpreted consistently by the national courts, had represented since 13 January 2021 an effective remedy for individuals who considered that they had been subjected to inadequate conditions of detention, and who were no longer held in conditions that were allegedly contrary to the Convention. Subsequently, in Vlad , cited above, §§   24-32, the Court considered it appropriate to apply an exception to the general principle that the effectiveness of a given remedy was to be assessed with reference to the date on which the application was lodged. For all the above reasons and in the light of all the material in its possession, since the applicants ceased to be held in conditions of detention that were allegedly contrary to the Convention after the moment when the tort action had been considered as representing an effective remedy (see, mutatis   mutandis, Polgar , §   96 and Vlad , §   23, both cited above; see the appended table for further details), but did not inform the Court of having brought such an action before the domestic courts, their applications must be dismissed for failure to exhaust domestic remedies. In light of the foregoing, the Court considers that it is not necessary to examine the Government’s additional objections as to the admissibility of these applications and decides that the applicants’ complaints in respect of the period described in the appended table must be dismissed on the ground that domestic remedies had not been exhausted, pursuant to Article 35 §§   1 and   4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 11 December 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 Facility Start and end date Duration     41824/17 25/07/2017 Gheorghiță GUZGANU 1978       Vaslui County Police Station; Vaslui, Iași and Gherla Prisons 11/10/2013 to 19/04/2023 9 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 9 day(s)     7252/20 16/11/2020 Gigi-Costel TEODOROV 1977   Boghină Carmen Bucharest Tulcea Prison 09/03/2018 to 10/05/2024 6 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 2 day(s)     12355/20 25/05/2020 Dumitru SĂNDICĂ 1970       Galați, Jilava, Brăila and Tulcea Prisons; Târgu Ocna Prison Hospital 06/05/2017 to 11/03/2024 6 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 6 day(s)     55953/20 18/01/2021 Ionuţ ANDREI 1988       Miercurea Ciuc, Aiud, Codlea, Deva, Gherla and Bistrița Prisons 01/12/2019 to 06/03/2025 5 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 6 day(s)     10823/21 06/06/2021 Dumitru-Antonel LĂCĂTUŞU 1966       Rahova and Jilava Prisons; Rahova Prison Hospital 29/09/2008 to 23/07/2012 3 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 25 day(s)   Jilava Prison 23/12/2019 to 27/08/2025 5 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 5 day(s)     16519/21 04/05/2021 Bogdan BAŞCHIR 1989       Slobozia and Poarta Albă Prisons 23/12/2019 to 03/07/2024 4 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 11 day(s)     25579/21 22/07/2021 Ilarie MACINGO 1975       Gherla, Baia Mare, Oradea and Bistrița Prisons 18/10/2018 to 24/10/2024 6 year(s) and 7 day(s)     488/22 16/12/2021 Paul-Andrei PÎRJOLEANU 1985       Rahova and Miercurea Ciuc Prisons 21/09/2020 to 09/12/2022 2 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 19 day(s)     13301/23 06/03/2023 Marcel-Silviu NEAGOE 1966       Târgu Jiu and Craiova Prison; Mioveni Prison Hospital 01/04/2022 to 01/04/2025 3 year(s) and 1 day(s)