M.M. v. RUSSIA - 7653/06 (Judgment : Violation of Right to an effective remedy (Effective remedy) (Prohibition of torture ...) [2017] ECHR 1120 (12 December 2017)

M.M. v. RUSSIA - 7653/06 (Judgment : Violation of Right to an effective remedy (Effective remedy) (Prohibition of torture ...) [2017] ECHR 1120 (12 December 2017)

The State failed to protect the applicant's right to privacy by allowing unlawful disclosure of his HIV status and did not provide an effective remedy for poor detention conditions. The criminal complaint process was unduly lengthy and ineffective, and civil remedies were not shown to be adequate. The Government's admission and compensation proposal resolved the Article 3 claim, but violations of Articles 8 and 13 were established.

Citation
[2017] ECHR 1120
Parties
Applicant: M. M.; Respondent: Russian Federation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
12 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Application to European Court of Human Rights / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application partly struck out, partly allowed
Legal Topics
Conditions of Detention, Disclosure of Medical Information, Right to Privacy, Effective Remedy, Length of Proceedings
Human Rights Criminal Law Civil Procedure Conditions of Detention Disclosure of Medical Information Right to Privacy Effective Remedy Length of Proceedings

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. M.

Applicant

Russian Federation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to European Court of Human Rights / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's conditions of detention violated Article 3 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had an effective remedy for poor detention conditions under Article 13
  3. 3 Whether disclosure of applicant's HIV status violated Article 8

Ratio Decidendi

The State failed to protect the applicant's right to privacy by allowing unlawful disclosure of his HIV status and did not provide an effective remedy for poor detention conditions. The criminal complaint process was unduly lengthy and ineffective, and civil remedies were not shown to be adequate. The Government's admission and compensation proposal resolved the Article 3 claim, but violations of Articles 8 and 13 were established.

Court Disposition

Application partly struck out, partly allowed

Orders

  • Struck out complaint under Article 3 regarding detention conditions per Government's unilateral declaration and compensation.
  • Declared complaints regarding lack of effective remedy for detention conditions and disclosure of HIV status admissible.