Milea and Others v. Romania

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 48707/18 Andrei-Costel MILEA against Romania and 5 other applications

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 November 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 raised an objection of inadmissibility and argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust the available effective remedies for the complaints about the inadequate conditions of 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 v. Romania (dec.), §§ 24-32, no. 122/17, 15 November 2022, 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 and in the light of all the material in its possession, since the applicants were no longer being held in conditions that were allegedly contrary to the Convention after the tort action had been considered as representing an effective remedy (see, mutatis mutandis , Polgar , § 96 and Vlad , § 23, both cited above, and further details in the appended table), 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, pursuant to Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

The Government also argued that applications nos. 48707/18, 1191/20, 1420/20 and 6613/20 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 14 December 2023.

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

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

48707/18

04/10/2018

Andrei-Costel MILEA

1989

Botoșani and Găești Prisons

09/02/2018 to 15/10/2022

4 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 7 day(s)

1191/20

10/02/2020

Sándor-Gyula SZÖCS

1975

Aiud and Târgu-Mureș Prison

14/11/2014 to 29/07/2022

7 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 16 day(s)

1420/20

21/02/2020

Sorin SOLOMON

1986

Iași, Botoșani, Găești Prisons

24/07/2012 to 31/05/2021

8 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 8 day(s)

6613/20

12/02/2020

Marian PANĂ

1976

Alexandria County Police, Giurgiu and Jilava Prisons

16/05/2017 to 02/03/2022

4 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 15 day(s)

11856/20

19/03/2020

Bogdan-Emanuel PARASCHIV

1975

Giurgiu Prison

19/12/2019 to 06/12/2021

1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 18 day(s)

21326/20

30/06/2020

Nicolae PARASCHIV

1974

Focșani and Tulcea Prisons

30/11/2019 to 06/04/2021

1 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 8 day(s)