Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights: March 2015

CASE OF KOPANITSYN v. RUSSIA, 12 March 2015
Decides, having regard to the terms of the Government’s declaration, and the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein, to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) in so far as it concerns the complaints under Articles 3 and 5 § 3 about the inhuman and degrading conditions of the applicant’s detention in remand prison IZ-77/1 in Moscow between 23 July and 10 September 2004 and the lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for his pre-trial detention; Holds that the respondent State has failed to comply with its obligations under Article 34.

CASE OF LYALYAKIN v. RUSSIA, 12 March 2015
A violation of Article 3 on account of the applicant’s undressing on 5 and 6 June 2007; a violation of Article 3 on account of the authorities’ failure to investigate effectively the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment.

CASE OF PUSHCHELENKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 12 March 2015
A violation of Article 5 § 3.

CASE OF GAMBULATOVA v. RUSSIA, 26 March 2015
A substantive violation of Article 2 in respect of Mr Vakhit Gambulatov; a procedural violation of Article 2 in respect of the failure to investigate the disappearance of Mr Vakhit Gambulatov; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicant on account of her son’s disappearance and the authorities’ response to her suffering; a violation of Article 5 in respect of Mr Vakhit Gambulatov on account of his unlawful detention; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3.

CASE OF VOLKOV AND ADAMSKIY v. RUSSIA, 26 March 2015
A violation of Article 6 § 1 in conjunction with Article 6 § 3 (c) on account of the absence of legal assistance in the appeal proceedings in the case of Mr Volkov.

CASE OF ZHEBRAILOVA AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA, 26 March 2015
A substantive violation of Article 2 in respect of Mr Balavdi Zhebrailov; a violation of Article 2 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the circumstances in which Mr Balavdi Zhebrailov disappeared; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the third applicant, on account of inhuman and degrading treatment inflicted upon him; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the failure to conduct an effective investigation into the allegations of inhuman and degrading treatment of the third applicant; a violation of Article 3 in respect of the applicants on account of their mental suffering; a violation of Article 5 in respect of Mr Balavdi Zhebrailov and the third applicant; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention in relation to the disappearance of Mr Balavdi Zhebrailov; a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3 in respect of the third applicant.
Comments