YANDIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 34541/06 1578/07 43811/06 - Chamber Judgment [2013] ECHR 940 (10 October 2013)

YANDIYEV AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA - 34541/06 1578/07 43811/06 - Chamber Judgment [2013] ECHR 940 (10 October 2013)

The Court found that the applicants established a prima facie case that their relatives were abducted by State agents, and the Government failed to rebut this presumption or provide a satisfactory explanation. The disappearances and lack of effective investigation constituted violations of Articles 2, 3, 5, and 13 of the Convention.

Citation
[2013] ECHR 940
Parties
Applicants: Yandiyev and Others; Respondent: Russian Federation
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
10 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment by Chamber of the First Section, European Court of Human Rights
Outcome
Applications allowed; violations found
Legal Topics
Enforced Disappearance, Right to Life (article 2 Echr), Effective Remedy (article 13 Echr), Prohibition of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (article 3 Echr), Right to Liberty and Security (article 5 Echr)
Human Rights Law International Law Enforced Disappearance Right to Life (article 2 Echr) Effective Remedy (article 13 Echr) Prohibition of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (article 3 Echr) Right to Liberty and Security (article 5 Echr)

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yandiyev and Others

Applicants

Russian Federation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Judgment by Chamber of the First Section, European Court of Human Rights

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicants' relatives were victims of enforced disappearance by State agents
  2. 2 Whether the Russian authorities failed to conduct effective investigations into the disappearances
  3. 3 Whether there was a violation of Articles 2, 3, 5, and 13 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the applicants established a prima facie case that their relatives were abducted by State agents, and the Government failed to rebut this presumption or provide a satisfactory explanation. The disappearances and lack of effective investigation constituted violations of Articles 2, 3, 5, and 13 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Applications allowed; violations found

Orders

  • The Russian Federation is to pay specified sums in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses to the applicants.
  • The Russian Federation is to conduct effective investigations into the disappearances.