CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 15 juin 2018

.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 }   Communicated on 15 June 2018   THIRD SECTION Application no. 8125/12 Svetlana Fedorovna VORONOVA against Russia lodged on 11 January 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE In 2006 the applicant’s son died of heart failure. His body was found together with identity papers. Nevertheless, the applicant was not informed of her son’s death until three month after the incident. By that time the body had already been cremated. The applicant initiated civil proceedings against the police seeking compensation for non-pecuniary damage. Her claims were dismissed. She appealed to no avail. The applicant complained to the Court, without invoking any particular Article of the Convention, that domestic authorities failed to undertake reasonable practical efforts in order to locate her and notify of her son’s death. As a result she had been left in a situation of a long-term unawareness and had been stripped of an opportunity to give him the proper burial. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Given the fact that the applicant was not promptly informed of her son’s death, has there been a violation of the applicant’s right guaranteed under Article 8 of the Convention?