Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> MEDVEDEV AND KOSTYUK v. UKRAINE - 61075/10 (Judgment : Article 5 - Right to liberty and security : Fifth Section Committee) [2018] ECHR 1057 (20 December 2018)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2018/1057.html
Cite as: [2018] ECHR 1057
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF MEDVEDEV AND KOSTYUK v. UKRAINE
(Applications nos. 61075/10and 27575/14 )
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
20 December 2018
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Medvedev and Kostyuk v. Ukraine,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Síofra O'Leary,
President,
Mārtiņš Mits,
Lado Chanturia,
judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt,
Acting
Deputy Section Registrar,
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 excessive length of their pre-trial detention.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 ARTICLE 5 § 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6. The applicants complained that their pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. They relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, which read as follows:Article 5 § 3
"3. Everyone arrested or detained in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 (c) of this Article shall be ... entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial. Release may be conditioned by guarantees to appear for trial."
7. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000-XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006-X, with further references). 8. In the leading cases of Kharchenko v. Ukraine, (no. 40107/02, 10 February 2011) and Ignatov v. Ukraine, (no. 40583/15, 15 December 2016), 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 length of the applicants' pre-trial detention was excessive. 10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention.III. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
11. 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."
12. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case-law, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. 13. 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 5 § 3 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of pre-trial detention;
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 20 December 2018, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv Tigerstedt Síofra O'Leary
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
(excessive length of pre-trial detention)
|
Application no. Date of introduction |
Applicant's name Date of birth |
Representative's name and location |
Period of detention |
Length of detention |
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1] | |
|
|
05/10/2010 |
Valeriy Viktorovich Medvedev 04/04/1962 |
|
28/02/2007 to 03/10/2007
04/12/2007 to 19/12/2008
24/02/2009 to 23/06/2011 |
7 months and 6 days
1 year and 16 days
2 years and 4 months |
2,500 |
|
|
25/03/2014 |
Anatoliy Viktorovych Kostyuk 15/05/1971 |
Yevgen Oleksandrovych Lukashenko Orlivka |
11/06/2010 to 18/04/2012
09/08/2012 to 17/06/2014 |
1 year, 10 months and 8 days
1 year, 10 months and 9 days |
2,300 |
[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.