THIRD SECTION

CASE OF YUDINA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Application no. 12860/11 and 7 other applications - see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

6 July 2017

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Yudina and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
	Luis López Guerra, President,
	Dmitry Dedov,
	Jolien Schukking, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 15 June 2017,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1.  The case originated in applications against Russia 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 Russian Government (“the Government”).
THE FACTS
3.  The list of applicants 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. Some applicants also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
Article I.	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.
Article II.	II.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6.  The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
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, §§ 139‑65, 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 Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, no. 5993/08, 28 November 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case (see also Gorbulya v. Russia, no. 31535/09, 6 March 2014).
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.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
Article III.	III.  REMAINING COMPLAINTS
11.  Some applicants also complained under Article 13 of the Convention, in accordance with the relevant well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table). These complaints are not manifestly ill‑founded within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) of the Convention, nor are they inadmissible on any other ground. Accordingly, they must be declared admissible. Having examined all the material before it, the Court concludes that they also disclose violations of the Convention in the light of its findings in Sergey Babushkin, cited above, §§ 38-45.
Article IV.	IV.  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, Sergey Babushkin v. Russia, (just satisfaction), no. 5993/08, 16 October 2014, and Mozharov and Others v. Russia, no. 16401/12 and 9 others, 21 March 2017), 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 Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;

4.  Holds that there has been a violation as regards the other complaints raised under well-established case-law of the Court (see appended table);

5.  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

6.  Dismisses the remainder of the applicants’ claims for just satisfaction.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 6 July 2017, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
	Liv Tigerstedt	Luis López Guerra
Acting Deputy Registrar	President	

APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention)
No.	Application no.
Date of introduction	Applicant name
Date of birth
	Representative name and location	Facility
Start and end date
Duration	Number of inmates per brigade
Sq. m. per inmate
Number of toilets per brigade	Specific grievances	Other complaints under well-established case-law	Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses
per applicant
(in euros)	
1.		12860/11
03/12/2014	Yelena Yuryevna Yudina
24/05/1967	
	IK-14 (ЖХ 285.14) Mordoviya Republic
25/06/2013 to
10/07/2015
2 year(s) and 16 day(s)	27 inmate(s)
0.6 m²
2 toilet(s)	no or restricted access to running water, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water		7,000	
2.		77799/14
27/01/2015	Nikolay Nikolayevich Tyurin
07/01/1977	
	IK-56 Lozvinskiy Sverdlovsk Region
27/12/2010
pending
More than 6 year(s) and
4 month(s) and 27 day(s)		no lavatory pan or running water due to absence of centralised water-supply or sewage systems, damp premises due to a bowl of used water of 10 litres under the washstand, a bucket as a lavatory emptied once a day, unpleasant odour of sewage, lavatory and washstand not separated from living area and in view of the guards observing the cell through the peephole in the door, water for drinking and all other needs of inadequate quality from an open water source, no hot water, no ventilation, lack of fresh air and natural light, dim electric light, daily walk of 1.30 hours, small waking yard of 10 sq.m., a cesspool located near the walking yard spread an unpleasant odour over it, no sport inventory	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	12,000	
3.		51648/15
03/10/2015	Dmitriy Viktorovich Baryshev
11/06/1978	Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Kostroma	IK-1 Kostroma
10/04/2012 to
30/06/2015
3 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 21 day(s)	150 inmate(s)
1.2 m²	unsafe condition of the building – cracks in the walls, damp premises - walls covered with fungus and in winter with ice, infestation with insects and rodents, no sanitary measures by administration, lack of fresh air and natural light, no ventilation, dim electric light, damp and small walking yards surrounded by iron walls of 3 m. high with lack of sunlight and wind plus sewage odour and puddles of water, four pairs of water taps in shower – one pair for 6 and more inmates, low water pressure, inmates infected with tuberculosis, poor quality of food and tableware	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	5,000	
4.		51675/15
03/10/2015	Yevgeniy Aleksandrovich Smirnov
31/08/1979	Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Kostroma	IK-1 Kostroma
26/01/2012 to
21/05/2015
3 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 26 day(s)	150 inmate(s)
1.2 m²	unsafe condition of the building – cracks in the walls, damp premises - walls covered with fungus and in winter with ice, infestation with insects and rodents, no sanitary measures by administration, lack of fresh air and natural light, no ventilation, dim electric light, damp and small walking yards surrounded by iron walls of 3 m. high with lack of sunlight and wind plus sewage odour and puddles of water, four pairs of water taps in shower – one pair for 6 and more inmates, low water pressure, inmates infected with tuberculosis, poor quality of food and tableware	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	5,000	
5.		52102/15
03/10/2015	Aleksey Vladimirovich Yablokov
11/04/1984	Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Kostroma	IK-1 Kostroma
26/02/2014 to
24/04/2015
1 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 30 day(s)	115 inmate(s)
	overcrowding – less than 2 sq.m. per inmate, unsafe condition of the building – cracks in the walls, damp premises - walls covered with fungus and in winter with ice, infestation with insects and rodents, no sanitary measures by administration, lack of fresh air and natural light, damp and small walking yards surrounded by iron walls of 3 m. high with lack of sunlight and wind plus sewage odour and puddles of water, poor food quality	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	5,000	
6.		39996/16
07/09/2016	Viktor Ivanovich Yakotsuts
06/08/1977	
	IK-2 Zabaykalskiy Region
14/04/2014 to
02/08/2016
2 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 20 day(s)	1.7 m²	overcrowding, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	5,000	
7.		55432/16
02/09/2016	Maksim Pavlovich Maltsev
27/09/1975	
	IK-29 Kirov Region
28/10/2011
pending
More than 5 year(s) and
6 month(s) and 27 day(s)	90 inmate(s)
1.7 m²	overcrowding, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, sharing cells with inmates infected with contagious disease, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	7,300	
8.		56142/16
14/09/2016	Dmitriy Sergeyevich Ilyichev
25/09/1983	Prokofyeva Viktoriya Pavlovna
St Petersburg	IK-4 Leningrad Region
13/03/2014 to
17/06/2016
2 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 5 day(s)	170 inmate(s)
1.9 m²	overcrowding, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient natural light, poor quality of potable water	Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention. 	5,000