A.N. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 61689/16 (Judgment : Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Third Section Committee) [2018] ECHR 860 (23 October 2018)

A.N. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 61689/16 (Judgment : Article 3 - Prohibition of torture : Third Section Committee) [2018] ECHR 860 (23 October 2018)

The Russian authorities failed to adequately assess the applicants' substantiated claims of a real risk of ill-treatment if removed, violating Article 3. Detention pending expulsion was not properly justified or reviewed, violating Article 5 § 1 (f). The length of appeal review in one case did not violate Article 5 § 4.

Citation
[2018] ECHR 860
Parties
Applicant: A. N.; Applicant: Z. S.; Applicant: Z. A.; Applicant: B. A.; Respondent: Russian Federation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
23 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Application (joined Cases) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Applications joined; violations found; partial just satisfaction awarded; costs awarded; remainder of claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extradition, Expulsion, Non Refoulement, Detention Pending Removal, Right to Liberty, Right to Security of Person, Prohibition of Torture, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, Just Satisfaction, Interim Measures
Human Rights Law Immigration Law Criminal Procedure Extradition Expulsion Non Refoulement Detention Pending Removal Right to Liberty +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. N.

Applicant

Z. S.

Applicant

Z. A.

Applicant

B. A.

Applicant

Russian Federation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Application (joined Cases) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether removal of applicants to Tajikistan/Uzbekistan would violate Article 3 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether detention pending expulsion violated Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention
  3. 3 Whether the length of appeal proceedings violated Article 5 § 4 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Russian authorities failed to adequately assess the applicants' substantiated claims of a real risk of ill-treatment if removed, violating Article 3. Detention pending expulsion was not properly justified or reviewed, violating Article 5 § 1 (f). The length of appeal review in one case did not violate Article 5 § 4.

Court Disposition

Applications joined; violations found; partial just satisfaction awarded; costs awarded; remainder of claims dismissed.

Orders

  • Joined the applications.
  • Declared complaints under Article 3 (removal) and Article 5 § 1 (f) (detention) admissible; Article 5 § 4 (length of appeal) inadmissible.