CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 mai 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Published on 26 May 2026   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 47460/20 Oleksandr Oleksiyovych SYENIN against Ukraine lodged on 9 October 2020 communicated on 4 May 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicant’s complaints under Articles   3 and 8 of the   Convention about the denial of long-stay family visits and various restrictions in respect of short visits (including communication only through a glass partition, prohibition of physical contact and lack of privacy) during his pre-trial detention from 6 August 2014 to 24   June 2020. The applicant also complains under Article 13 of the Convention that there were no effective domestic remedies in that regard.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was there a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life under Article 8 of the Convention on account of various limitations on family visits during his pre-trial detention?   2.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for the above complaint, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?