lagen.nu
no. 64447/16

Keri and Others v. Romania

Inadmissible

Domstol
European Court of Human Rights
Avgörandedatum
2023-12-14
ECLI
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2023:1214DEC006444716
Artiklar
3, 35
Källa
hudoc.echr.coe.int

Berörda konventionsartiklar

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 64447/16 Florin KERI against Romania and 3 other applications

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 14 December 2023 as a Committee composed of:

Faris Vehabović , President , Anja Seibert-Fohr, Anne Louise Bormann , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

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

Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the present applications are inadmissible.

The applicants complained principally about the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.

The Government argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust the available effective remedies for the complaints about the inadequate conditions of their detention, as the action in tort had become an effective remedy for grievances similar to those of the applicants, allowing them to have the violation of the Convention acknowledged, either explicitly or in substance, and to receive adequate and sufficient compensation at domestic level. The Government expressly referred to Vlad v. Romania (dec.), no. 122/17, 15 November 2022, either directly in its observations or by a subsequent letter, and invited the Court to declare the cases inadmissible.

The Court recalls that in Polgar v. Romania , no. 39412/19, §§ 94 ‑ 96, 20 July 2021, it held that an action in tort, based on Articles 1349 and 1357 of the Romanian Civil Code, as interpreted consistently by the national courts, had represented since 13 January 2021 an effective remedy for individuals who considered that they had been subjected to inadequate conditions of detention and who were no longer being held in conditions that were allegedly contrary to the Convention. Subsequently, in Vlad , cited above, §§ 24 ‑ 32, the Court considered it appropriate to apply an exception to the general principle that the effectiveness of a given remedy was to be assessed with reference to the date on which the application was lodged.

For all the above reasons and in the light of all the material in its possession, since the applicants ceased to be held in conditions of detention that were allegedly contrary to the Convention after the moment when the tort action had been considered as representing an effective remedy (see, mutatis mutandis , Polgar , § 96 and Vlad , § 23, both cited above; see the appended table for further details), but did not inform the Court of having brought such an action before the domestic courts, their applications must be dismissed for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.

The Government also argued that applications nos. 64447/16 and 65069/16 must be rejected in part as incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention, because the applicants lost their victim status as they had benefitted from the remedy introduced by Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences.

Since it has already upheld the Government’s objection on the non ‑ exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine further the question of incompatibility ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention.

In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that these applications must be dismissed on the ground that domestic remedies had not been exhausted, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Declares the applications inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 18 January 2024.

{signature_p_2}

Viktoriya Maradudina Faris Vehabović 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’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

64447/16

28/11/2016

Florin KERI

1982

Cezara ‑ Maria

Nichita ‑ Costescu

Timișoara

Bacău, Rahova, Iaşi and Arad Prisons

01/01/2009 to

07/06/2021

12 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 7 day(s)

65069/16

02/11/2016

Constantin RUBINĂ

1984

Cezara ‑ Maria

Nichita ‑ Costescu

Timișoara

Rahova, Arad and Timişoara Prisons

19/08/2008 to

26/01/2022

13 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 8 day(s)

21787/20

18/05/2020

Vasile TIMOCE

1990

Gherla Prison

23/12/2019

12/01/2022

2 year(s) and 21 day(s)

17050/21

21/04/2021

Cătălin DELIVER

1983

Brăila and Giurgiu Prisons

24/12/2019 to

25/07/2023

3 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 2 day(s)