THIRD SECTION

CASE OF KALYAKANOV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 22872/10 and 7 others – see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

4 May 2017

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

In the case of Kalyakanov and Others v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
	Luis López Guerra, President,
	Dmitry Dedov,
	Branko Lubarda, judges,
and Karen Reid, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 30 April 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.
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 of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 3
“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, §§ 139‑165, 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 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.
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.  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, to its case‑law and the long delay for some of the applicants in filing the application, 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 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of 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 4 May 2017, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
	Karen Reid	Luis López Guerra
	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	Sq. m. per inmate
	Specific grievances	Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)	
1.		22872/10
30/03/2010	Vladimir Vladimirovich Kalyakanov
16/05/1964	
	IK-11 Bor Nizhniy Novgorod Region
10/10/2010 to
12/05/2011
7 month(s) and 3 day(s)
	0.15 m²

	6 sinks, 4 pans and 1 shower cubicle for 170 detainees, no hot water, poor quality of food.
	3,600	
2.		32203/10
22/04/2010	Oleg Aleksandrovich Kitayev
11/08/1969	
	IK-3 Voronezh Region
30/09/2010
pending
More than 6 year(s) and
6 month(s) and 1 day(s)
	1.8 m²

	No artificial ventilation, constant cigarette smoke, poor lighting, mice and insects, 3 urinals, 5 pans and 5 water taps for 152 inmates, no hot water, poor quality of food.
	21,800	
3.		32209/10
14/04/2010	Aleksandr Vladimirovich Matveychuk
02/01/1949	
	Prison hospital no. LIU-8 Neftekumsk Stavropol Region
10/03/2010
pending
More than 7 year(s) and
21 day(s)
	2 m²

	Poor lighting, no ventilation, poor sanitary conditions (lavatory and washing-stands outside, no partition or doors when using lavatory), 8 pans and 7 sinks for 250-300 inmates, no hot water, poor quality of food.

	23,300	
4.		41192/10
19/06/2010	Sergey Grigoryevich Rybakov
18/04/1976	
	IK-6 Melekhovo, Vladimir Region
13/08/2009 to
17/12/2015
6 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 5 day(s)
	1 m²

	21,300	
5.		45844/11
17/06/2011	Marina Nikolayevna Golovanova
12/02/1986	
	IK-7 Ivanovo
14/08/2012 to
23/07/2013
11 month(s) and 10 day(s)
	1.2 m²

	No ventilation, low temperature in the cell in winter time, 4 pans for 100 women-inmates, tuberculosis-infected inmates in the dormitory.
	5,000	
6.		33684/15
10/06/2015	Aleksandr Viktorovich Svinarev
15/11/1982	
	IK-11 Nizhny Novgorod Region
04/04/2011
pending
More than 5 year(s) and
11 month(s) and 27 day(s)
	1.2 m²

	No warm clothes in winter time, 6 sinks and 6 pans for 135 inmates, no hot water, poor quality of food.

	10,500	
7.		34832/15
25/06/2015	Aleksandr Vladimirovich Kaurov
04/07/1981	Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Kostroma	IK-1 Kostroma
18/04/2012 to
22/04/2015
3 year(s) and 5 day(s)
	1.2 m²

	4 water taps for 150 inmates, tuberculosis-infected and nob-infected inmates held together, mould on the walls, high humidity, rats and insects, no ventilation, poor quality of food, poor lighting.
	5,000	
8.		37434/15
30/06/2015	Konstantin Andreyevich Salmin
04/06/1987	Vinogradov Aleksandr Vladimirovich
Kostroma	IK-4 Kostroma Region
13/08/2012 to
19/05/2015
2 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 7 day(s)
	2 m²

	Infestation, mice and rats, mould on the walls, lack of natural and artificial lighting, poor ventilation, poor quality of food, rusty water.
	5,000