CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 octobre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 19 October 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no. 32248/12 Firuzzhon Bakhronovich IBROGIMOV against Russia lodged on 30 May 2012 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Firuzzhon Bakhronovich Ibrogimov, is a national of Uzbekistan, who was born in 1992 and currently lives in Bukhara. He is represented before the Court by Ms L. Ovchinnikova, a lawyer practising in Vladivostok. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was born in Uzbekistan. In 2003 his father, mother, brother and sister moved to Vladivostok in Russia and subsequently acquired Russian nationality, while he continued to live with his grandfather in Bukhara, visiting them in the summer months. After his grandfather died and the applicant finished secondary school, in June 2011 he joined his family in Russia. On 23 September 2011 the Consumer Protection Authority declared the applicant’s presence in Russian undesirable (the “exclusion order”) because he tested positive for HIV during a mandatory medical examination. By judgment of 19 December 2011, the Sovetskiy District Court in Vladivostok rejected the applicant’s challenge to the exclusion order, finding that it was issued in full compliance with Russian law. On 13 February 2012 the Primorskiy Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 14 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 8, that he was discriminated against on account of his medical condition. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Having regard to the principles established in the Court’s case-law in similar cases (see Kiyutin v.   Russia , no. 2700/10, ECHR 2011, and Novruk and Others v. Russia , nos. 31039/11, 48511/11, 76810/12, 14618/13 and   13817/14, 15 March 2016), was there a violation of the applicant’s right to be protected against discrimination under Article 14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with his right to respect for his private and family life under Article 8?