European Court of Human Rights

 

 

 

FOURTH SECTION

 

 

 

 

 

 

CASE OF BALOGH AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

 

(Application no. 26982/12 and 9 other applications - see appended list)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

STRASBOURG

 

10 December 2015

 

 

 

This judgment is final. It may be subject to editorial revision.




In the case of Balogh and Others v. Hungary,

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:

          Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,
          Egidijus Kūris,
          Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 19 November 2015,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The cases originated in applications against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2.  The applications were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”).

THE FACTS

3.  The list of applicants, their representatives and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4.  The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and of the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law.

THE LAW

I.  JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS

5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.

II.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 3 AND 13 OF THE CONVENTION

6.  The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention and that they had no effective remedy in this connection. They relied on Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention, which read as follows:

Article 3

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

Article 13

“Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority ...”

7.  The Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case-law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 90-94, ECHR 2000-XI, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 139-165, 10 January 2012). It reiterates in particular that extreme lack of space in a prison cell or overcrowding weighs heavily as an aspect to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the impugned detention conditions were “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see, amongst many authorities, Karalevičius v. Lithuania, no. 53254/99, §§ 36-40, 7 April 2005).

8.  In the leading case of Varga and Others v. Hungary (nos. 14097/12, 45135/12, 73712/12, 34001/13, 44055/13, and 64586/13, 10 March 2015), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

9.  Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate.

10.  The Court further notes that the applicants did not have at their disposal an effective remedy by which to submit their complaints concerning their conditions of detention.

11.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.

III.  APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION

12.  Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

13.  Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law (see, in particular, Varga and Others v. Hungary, nos. 14097/12, 45135/12, 73712/12, 34001/13, 44055/13, and 64586/13, 10 March 2015), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

14.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1.  Decides to join the applications;

 

2.  Declares the applications admissible;

 

3.  Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of an effective remedy;

 

4.  Holds

(a)  that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b)  that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 10 December 2015, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

    Hasan Bakırcı                                                             Vincent A. De Gaetano
Acting Deputy Registrar                                                            President




APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention

(inadequate conditions of detention and lack of any effective remedy in domestic law)

No.	Application no. Date of introduction	Applicant name Date of birth	Representative name and location	Facility Start and end date Duration	Sq. m. per inmate	Specific grievances	Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros)[i]	Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros)[ii]
1.	26982/12 24/04/2012	András BALOGH 08/05/1965	Karsai Dániel András Budapest	Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén County Prison, Budapest Prison, Vác Prison and Márianosztra Prison 23/02/2006 to 26/03/2012 6 year(s) and 2 month(s)	1.6 - 2.1 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell	20,500	300
2.	131/13 17/12/2012	Zsolt TÓTH 30/05/1975	Turán Tünde Budapest	Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County Prison and Budapest Prison 29/01/2012 to 05/03/2012 0 year(s) and 2 month(s)   Budapest Prison and Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County Prison   14/03/2012 to 23/07/2014 2 year(s) and 5 month(s)     Budapest Prison 23/07/2014 pending 1 year(s) and 3 month(s)	2 m²           2.6 m²             3.4 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects, only cold water in cell     toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects, only cold water in cell       toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects, only cold water in cell	13,500	300
3.	6764/13 17/01/2013	László PATAKI 06/05/1979	Fahidi Gergely Budapest	Budapest Prison, Block "A" 03/02/2011 to 20/04/2012 1 year(s) and 3 month(s)       Budapest Prison, Block "B" 20/04/2012 to 01/06/2012 0 year(s) and 2 month(s)     Budapest Prison, Block "A" 01/06/2012 pending 3 year(s) and 5 month(s)	2.6 m²             3.1 m²           3.25 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, shower only once a week, infestation of the cell with insects, lack of (adequate) heating, lack of (sufficient) natural light   infestation of the cell with insects, lack of (adequate) heating, lack of (sufficient) natural light, shower only once a week   shower only once a week, toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects, lack of (sufficient) natural light, lack of (adequate) heating	16,500	300
4.	19712/13 06/03/2013	Zsolt NAGY 07/01/1971		Szabolcs-Szatmár-Bereg County Prison 23/04/2010 to 10/12/2012 2 year(s) and 8 month(s)	2 m²	shower only once a week, bedbugs	10,000
5.	19892/13 11/03/2013	Csaba JÁRÓKA 22/09/1982	Turán Tünde Budapest	Budapest Correctional Facility, Block III. ("Maglódi/Venyige") 02/08/2010 to 23/09/2010 0 year(s) and 2 month(s)     Budapest Prison 23/09/2010 pending 5 year(s) and 1 month(s)	3.75 m²             2.6 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, lack of fresh air, only cold water in cell	17,800	300
6.	37487/13 04/06/2013	János ZUSCHLAG 07/05/1977		Bács-Kiskun County Prison 02/09/2007 to 30/06/2008 0 year(s) and 10 month(s)   Állampuszta Prison 30/06/2008 to 30/08/2008 0 year(s) and 3 month(s)   Bács-Kiskun County Prison 30/08/2008 to 01/02/2012 3 year(s) and 6 month(s)	3 m²         2.5 m²         1.9 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, insufficient number of beds in the cell, only cold water in cell   insufficient number of beds in the cell, only cold water in cell     insufficient number of beds in the cell, only cold water in cell	15,800
7.	42486/13 21/06/2013	Tamás József BULENDA 18/09/1982	Németh Renáta Budapest	Budapest Correctional Facility 15/09/2004 to 30/11/2004 0 year(s) and 3 month(s)   Pálhalma Prison 30/11/2004 to 20/09/2005 0 year(s) and 10 month(s)       Budapest Prison 20/09/2005 to 23/12/2012 7 year(s) and 4 month(s)	3.75 m²         2.5 m²             3.3 m²	infestation of the cell with insects       infestation of the cell with insects           toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects	27,300	300
8.	42808/13 20/06/2013	Attila FÖLDES-SZABÓ 18/11/1969	Csőzik László Budapest	Budapest Prison 01/10/2012 pending 3 year(s) and 1 month(s)	3 m²	toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects	11,300	300
9.	43610/13 01/07/2013	Kornél LELKES 02/04/1980	Cech András Budapest	Budapest Correctional Facility 29/10/2009 to 16/11/2009 0 year(s) and 1 month(s)   Budapest Prison and Győr-Moson-Sopron County Prison 21/06/2010 to 17/10/2012 2 year(s) and 4 month(s)   Budapest Prison 01/02/2013 to 22/04/2013 0 year(s) and 3 month(s)   Budapest Prison 22/04/2013 to 29/06/2013 0 year(s) and 3 month(s)	3.75 m²         2.5 m²           3.1 m²         3.6 m²	shower only once a week         toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, shower only once a week       shower only once a week         shower only once a week	10,800	300
10.	43868/13 24/06/2013	László SANYÓ 24/02/1979		Hajdú-Bihar County Prison 08/06/2011 to 29/05/2012 1 year(s)   Budapest Prison 06/06/2012 to 20/12/2013 1 year(s) and 7 month(s)	2.7 m²         2.6 m²	lack of fresh air, shower only once a week       toilet not separated from the rest of the cell, infestation of the cell with insects	9,800

 




---

[i] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

[ii] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.