CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 9 avril 2026

.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 } .sA43C3626 { width:28.35pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s329183A { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:14pt; 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 } .sA10C00D6 { width:14.54pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .sD3C5A1EB { width:132.75pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s935FFEBF { width:7.54pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .sDCEB1D12 { width:138.09pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .sD83D131C { width:123.4%; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s659F319D { width:10.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 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 } .sAE4D075C { width:25.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s753A19D6 { width:39.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s54656D9C { width:24.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s4EE5B81F { width:10.9%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s24075AA6 { width:25.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC3FF694F { width:39.18%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sAEF4F718 { width:24.84%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Applications nos. 10869/25 and 15090/25 Volodymyr Georgiyovych ZAGOR against Ukraine and Oleg Vasylyovych KALYUZHNYY against Ukraine (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 9 April 2026 as a Committee composed of:   Andreas Zünd , President ,   Diana Sârcu,   Mykola Gnatovskyy , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above 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, 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 were represented by Mr S.M. Rybiy, a lawyer practising in Dnipro, Ukraine. The applicants’ complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law were communicated to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”). On the various dates indicated in the appended table the Registry was informed that the applicants had died and that their applications to the Court would not be pursued for the absence of heirs. 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. It has been the Court’s practice to strike applications out of the list of cases under Article 37 § 1 of the Convention in the absence of any heir or close relative who has expressed the wish to pursue an application (see Léger v.   France (striking out) [GC], no.   19324/02, §   44, 30   March   2009, with further references). Turning to the circumstances of the present case, the Court notes that the applicants died in the course of the proceedings. No heirs or close relatives have expressed the wish to pursue the applications on their behalf. As the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights which require the continued examination of the applications, it considers it appropriate to strike the applications out of its list of cases under Article   37 §   1 (c) of the Convention. 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 May 2026.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Andreas Zünd   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Date of the letter informing of the applicant’s death 1 10869/25 23/03/2025 Volodymyr Georgiyovych ZAGOR 1968 11/10/2025 2 15090/25 30/04/2025 Oleg Vasylyovych KALYUZHNYY 1965 06/11/2025