003-3863187-4444220

issued by the Registrar of the Court   ECHR 087 (2012)   01.03.2012   Judgments concerning Russia and Ireland   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following three   judgments, of which the judgment in the length-of-proceedings case of C. v. Ireland is a   Committee judgment and is final. The others are Chamber judgments and are not final.   Repetitive cases2 and length-of-proceedings cases, with the Court’s main finding   indicated, can be found at the end of the press release. The judgments are available only   in English.   Dmitriy Sazonov v. Russia (application no. 30268/03)   The applicant, Dmitriy Sazonov, is a Russian national who was born in 1974 and lives in   the Leningradskiy Region (Russia). Arrested in December 1998 on suspicion of robbery   and murder, Mr Sazonov complained about the appalling conditions of his detention in a   remand centre in St Petersburg from 1998 to 2003 and that, as a result, he had   contracted tuberculosis. He relied on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading   treatment).   Violation of Article 3 (conditions of detention)   Just satisfaction: The applicant did not submit a claim for just satisfaction.   Repetitive case   The following case raised issues which had already been submitted to the Court.   Kolegovy v. Russia (no. 15226/05)   The applicants, wheelchair-bound, complained about not being notified of appeal   hearings in civil proceedings they had brought concerning the social-security services’   refusal to provide them with a car adapted to their disability. They relied on Article 6 § 1   (right to a fair hearing). Further relying on Article 34 (right of individual petition), the   first applicant also complained that the domestic courts had refused to give access to the   case file to her representative in the proceedings before the European Court.   Violation of Article 6 § 1   No violation of Article 34   Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month   period following a judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber   of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel of five judges considers whether the case deserves further   examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a final judgment. If the referral   request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,   judgments delivered by a Committee are final.   Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for   supervision of its execution. Further information about the execution process can be found here:   www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution   In which the Court has reached the same findings as in similar cases raising the same issues under the   Convention.   Length-of-proceedings case   C. v. Ireland (no. 24643/08)   In this case, the applicant, a former school teacher in Dublin, complained in particular   about the excessive length of criminal proceedings brought against him for sexually   assaulting five students at his school.   Violation of Article 6 § 1   This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court.   Decisions, judgments and further information about the Court can be found on   www.echr.coe.int. To receive the Court’s press releases, please subscribe to the Court’s   RSS feeds.   Press contacts   [email protected]e.int | tel: +33 3 90 21 42 08   Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 30)   Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (tel: + 33 3 88 41 35 70)   Céline Menu-Lange (tel: + 33 3 90 21 58 77)   Nina Salomon (tel: + 33 3 90 21 49 79)   Denis Lambert (tel: + 33 3 90 21 41 09)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of   Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European   Convention on Human Rights.   2