CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 9 juillet 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 9 July 2020 Published on 27 July 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 9800/12 Adelya Faridovna GAYNUTDINOVA against Russia lodged on 25 January 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged unlawfulness of the applicant’s continued involuntary treatment in a psychiatric facility (Article 5 § 1 of the Convention), the allegedly lengthy period of the appeal review of the decisions of the Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan adopted on 1 June and 18   October 2011 (Article 5 § 4 of the Convention), as well as allegedly inadequate conditions of detention in the psychiatric facility (Article 3 of the Convention). A violation of the applicant’s rights was acknowledged by judgment of the Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan of 14 March 2012 and she was awarded 15,000 Russian roubles in non-pecuniary damage.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the material conditions of the applicant’s detention, in particular the manner of access to sanitary facilities and the manner of use of physical restraints, amount to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article   3 of the Convention? Given the acknowledgment of a violation of the applicant’s rights by judgment of the Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan of 14   March 2012 and the award of 15,000 Russian roubles, does the applicant maintain her victim status?   2.     Was the applicant deprived of her liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention by the decisions of the Sovetskiy District Court of Kazan adopted on 1 June and 18 October 2011? In particular, did the above decisions extending the applicant’s involuntary treatment satisfy the requirements of Article 5 § 1 (e) of the Convention (see Winterwerp v.   the   Netherlands , 24 October 1979, §§ 37-40, Series A no. 33)?   3.     Was the length of the appeal review of the decisions of 1 June and 18   October 2011 compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention (see Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos. 10211/12 and 27505/14, §§   251-77, 4 December 2018)?