Москва
+7-929-527-81-33
Вологда
+7-921-234-45-78
Вопрос юристу онлайн Юридическая компания ЛЕГАС Вконтакте

Новости от 06 октября 2018 года из блога, посвященного практике в Европейском суде по правам человека ЕСПЧ

Обновлено 06.10.2018 16:17

 

The case has successfully examined the applicants' complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention in places where the sentence was served. The case has violated the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

In 2013, 2014 and 2015, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

In their complaints, the applicants (15 people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served.

On May 4, 2017, on complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirement of Article 3 of the Convention (prohibition of torture) against all applicants, and ordered the respondent state to pay the applicants a total of EUR 73,900 compensation for moral damage, material damage and court costs. The applicants were awarded various amounts from 1,400 to 15,500 euros.

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 on the case of Dudnikov and Others v. Russia (аpplications No. 63928/13, 70723/13, 71658/13, 75596/13, 77417/13, 33654/14, 12889 / 15 and 13252/15).


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1022-dudnikov-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case has successfully examined complaints about the excessive length of the applicants' detention pending trial. The case has violated the requirements of paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2015 and 2016, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints the applicants (seven people) complained about the excessive length of the detention pending trial.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints lodged by the applicants, the European Court unanimously ruled that in the present case the authorities violated the requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (the right to liberty and personal integrity) in respect of all applicants, and ordered the respondent state to pay A total of 21,300 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. The applicants were awarded various amounts from 1,000 to 6,400 euros.

 

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 on the case of Sarbakhtin and Others (Russian Federation) (аpplications N 611/15, 9585/15, 30621/15, 35376/15, 39351/15, 45035/15 and 5022 /16).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1023-sarbakhtin-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case has successfully examined the applicants' complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention in places where the sentence was served, as well as the fact that they did not have an effective remedy in this regard. The case has violated the requirements of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2013 and 2015, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (eight people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. The six applicants also claimed that they did not have an effective remedy in that regard.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints lodged by the applicants, the European Court unanimously ruled that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) in respect of all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) in respect of six applicants , and ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of € 60,600 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 5,000 to 15,300 euros.

 

ECHR judgment of May 4, 2017 in the case of Merzlyachenko and Others (Merzlyachenko and Others) v. Russia (аpplications N 60839/13, 63289/13, 63379/13, 63440/13, 63632/13, 63638/13, 80928 / 13 and 38267/15).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1024-merzlyachenko-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case has successfully examined the applicants' complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention in places where the sentence was served, as well as the fact that they did not have an effective remedy in this regard. The case has violated the requirements of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014 and 2015, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (11 people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. The applicants also claimed that they did not have an effective remedy in this regard.

 

On May 4, 2017, on complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously ruled that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) against all applicants, and ordered the State - the respondent to pay the applicants a total of EUR 120,900 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 5,000 to 21,300 euros.

 

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 on the case of Kapustin and Others (Kapustin and Others) v. Russia (аpplications N 58889/10, 70075/10, 51746/11, 75357/11, 11516/12, 13625/12, 16579 / 12, 51488/14, 28479/15, 37184/15 and 43036/15).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1025-kapustin-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

In the case, the applicants' complaints regarding inhuman conditions of detention during their transfer were successfully examined. In the case of violations of the requirements of articles 3, 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2010, 2012 and 2014, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (eight people) complained about inhuman conditions of detention during their transfer. The six applicants also complained about the lack of effective remedies in this regard. Two applicants also complained about the excessive length of the detention pending trial, and the first also that the court did not immediately consider the lawfulness of his detention.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) in respect of all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) in respect of six applicants , Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (the right to liberty and security of person) in respect of two applicants and Article 5 § 4 of the Convention in respect of the first applicant. The European Court ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of EUR 26,500 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 5,000 to 6,500 euros.

 

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 in the case of Kavalerov and Others v. Russia (аpplications N 55477/10, 62920/10, 15017/12, 3420/14, 60833/14, 61841/14, 64767 / 14 and 65467/14).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1026-kavalerov-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case successfully examined the applicants' complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served, the first applicant also pointed out the inappropriate conditions of the transfer, the excessive length of detention pending trial and that the court did not consider the lawfulness of his detention without delay. In the case of violations of the requirements of Articles 3 and 13, paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2014, 2015 and 2016, claimants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (eight people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. The first applicant also complained about the inappropriate conditions of the transfer, the excessive length of the detention pending trial and that the court did not consider the lawfulness of his detention without delay. The three applicants also claimed that they did not have effective remedies for inhuman conditions of detention.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of Article 3 (prohibition of torture) in relation to all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) in respect of three applicants , paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 5 of the Convention (the right to liberty and security of person) in respect of the first applicant. The European Court ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of EUR 56,300 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 2,100 to 15,300 euros.

 

ECHR judgment of May 4, 2017 in the case of Kazakov and Others (Kazakov and Others) v. Russia (аpplications N 4649/08, 36240/08, 4315/09, 16078/10, 54313/11, 59251/14, 3949 / 15 and 1672/16).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1027-kazakov-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case was successfully considered complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention of the applicants in places of serving the sentence, the lack of effective remedies. The case has violated the requirements of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2011, 2012 and 2013, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (12 people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. The six applicants also claimed that they did not have an effective remedy in that regard.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) in respect of all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) in respect of six , and ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of 113,900 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. The applicants were awarded various amounts from 1,400 to 22,800 euros.

 

ECHR judgment of May 4, 2017 in the case of Biryukov and Others v. Russia (аpplications No. 36006/11, 37211/11, 53965/12, 53969/12, 55356/12, 74792/12, 76153 / 12, 77937/12 and 56384/13).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1028-biryukov-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case was successfully considered complaints about the inhuman conditions of detention of the applicants in places of serving the sentence, the lack of effective remedies. The case has violated the requirements of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2014 and 2015, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (11 people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. Eight applicants also claimed that they did not have an effective remedy in this regard.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously ruled that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) in relation to all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) in respect of eight applicants , and ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of EUR 87,600 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 5,000 to 14,000 euros.

 

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 on the case of Gashimov and Others (Gashimov and Others) v. Russia (аpplications N 31408/14, 32432/14, 12927/15, 17262/15, 17957/15, 18035/15, 23523 / 15, 23890/15, 25301/15, 59787/15 and 59951/15).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1029-gashimov-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case has successfully considered complaints about the inhuman conditions of the applicants' detention in places of punishment, the lack of effective remedies for inhuman conditions, the use of metal cells in the courtroom, and the excessive length of detention pending trial. The case has violated the requirements of articles 3, 13, clause 3 of article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (six people) complained about the inhuman conditions of detention in the places where the sentence was served. Some claimants complained about the lack of effective remedies due to inhuman conditions, the use of metal cells in the courtroom and the excessive length of pre-trial detention.

 

On May 4, 2017, on complaints filed by the applicants, the European Court unanimously ruled that in the present case the authorities violated the requirements of articles 3 (prohibition of torture) in relation to all applicants and 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective domestic remedy) and paragraph 3 of article 5 of the Convention (the right to liberty and security of person) in respect of individual applicants. The European Court ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants a total of EUR 59,050 in compensation for non-pecuniary damage, pecuniary damage and court costs. Applicants were awarded various amounts from 6,750 to 19,300 euros.

 

ECHR judgment of May 4, 2017 in the case of Gusev and Others (Gusev and Others) v. Russia (аpplications N 28348/13, 63693/14, 53169/15, 58195/15, 22883/16 and 24726/16).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1030-gusev-and-others-c-russia .

 

 

The case has successfully examined complaints about the excessive length of the applicants' detention pending trial. The case has violated the requirements of paragraph 3 of Article 5 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

 

In 2008 and 2009, complainants were assisted in preparing аpplications. Subsequently, the аpplications were merged and communicated to the Russian Federation.

 

In their complaints, the applicants (four people) complained about the excessive length of their detention pending trial.

 

On May 4, 2017, on the complaints lodged by the applicants, the European Court unanimously decided that in the present case the authorities violated the requirement of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (the right to liberty and security of person) and ordered the respondent State to pay the applicants 7,400 euros compensation for moral damage, material damage and court costs. The applicants were awarded various amounts from 1,000 to 3,200 euros.

 

ECHR Ordinance of May 4, 2017 on the case of Geval and Others v. The Russian Federation (аpplications no. 24185/08, 60126/08, 48750/09 and 50583/09).

 


Source of publication: http://espchhelp.ru/blog/1031-geval-and-others-c-russia .