I correctly predicted that there was a violation of human rights in KURKOV v. RUSSIA.

Information

  • Judgment date: 2025-05-15
  • Communication date: 2024-12-19
  • Application number(s): 2157/22
  • Country:   RUS
  • Relevant ECHR article(s): 5, 5-3
  • Conclusion:
    Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-3 - Length of pre-trial detention)
  • Result: Violation
    • SEE FINAL JUDGMENT

JURI Prediction

  • Probability: 0.886043
  • Prediction: Violation

  • Consistent


Legend

 In line with the court's judgment
 In opposition to the court's judgment
Darker color: higher probability
: In line with the court's judgment  
: In opposition to the court's judgment

Communication text used for prediction

Published on 20 January 2025 (see table appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the application on 19 December 2024, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the application should be given to the Government of Russia.
In the enclosed table, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER The application concern complaints raised under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention relating to excessive length of pre-trial detention which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Dirdizov v. Russia, no.
41461/10, 27 November 2012).
APPENDIX – Application raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention(excessive length of pre-trial detention) Application no.
Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Period of detention Court which issued detention order/examined appeal Length of detention Specific defects 2157/22 20/12/2021 Aleksey Nikolayevich KURKOV 1975 Aleksandr Anatolyevich Kosarev Moscow 24/07/2020 to 30/10/2021 Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction 1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 7 day(s) fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention Published on 20 January 2025 (see table appended) PROCEDURAL INFORMATION Following a preliminary examination of the admissibility of the application on 19 December 2024, the Court decided, under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court, that notice of the application should be given to the Government of Russia.
In the enclosed table, whenever an applicant is referred to using initials, this indicates that the Court has authorised anonymity for that person, whose identity will not be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).
For further information on the procedure following communication of an application brought against Russia, subject of well-established case law of the Court, please refer to the Court’s website.
SUBJECT MATTER The application concern complaints raised under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention relating to excessive length of pre-trial detention which are the subject of well-established case law of the Court (see Dirdizov v. Russia, no.
41461/10, 27 November 2012).
APPENDIX – Application raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention(excessive length of pre-trial detention) Application no.
Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Representative’s name and location Period of detention Court which issued detention order/examined appeal Length of detention Specific defects 2157/22 20/12/2021 Aleksey Nikolayevich KURKOV 1975 Aleksandr Anatolyevich Kosarev Moscow 24/07/2020 to 30/10/2021 Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction 1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 7 day(s) fragility of the reasons employed by the courts; use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice; failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention

Judgment

THIRD SECTION
CASE OF KURKOV v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 2157/22)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG
15 May 2025

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kurkov v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Diana Kovatcheva, President, Úna Ní Raifeartaigh, Mateja Đurović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 24 April 2025,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 20 December 2021. 2. The applicant was represented by Mr A. Kosarev, a lawyer practising in Moscow. 3. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the application. THE FACTS
4. The applicant’s details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table. 5. The applicant complained of the unreasonably lengthy pre-trial detention. THE LAW
6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violation of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present application (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‐73, 17 January 2023). 7. The applicant complained that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. He relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. 8. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000‐XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006‐X, with further references). 9. In the leading case of Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the the applicant’s pre-trial detention was unreasonably long. 11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. 12. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‐law (see, in particular, Pastukhov and Yelagin v. Russia, no. 55299/07, 19 December 2013), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 15 May 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court. Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
(excessive length of pre-trial detention)
Application no. Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth

Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
Length of detention
Specific defects
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‐pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
2157/22
20/12/2021
Aleksey Nikolayevich KURKOV
1975

Kosarev Aleksandr Anatolyevich
Moscow
24/07/2020 to
30/10/2021
Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction
1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 7 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention
1,400

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. THIRD SECTION
CASE OF KURKOV v. RUSSIA
(Application no. 2157/22)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG
15 May 2025

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Kurkov v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Diana Kovatcheva, President, Úna Ní Raifeartaigh, Mateja Đurović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 24 April 2025,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 20 December 2021. 2. The applicant was represented by Mr A. Kosarev, a lawyer practising in Moscow. 3. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the application. THE FACTS
4. The applicant’s details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table. 5. The applicant complained of the unreasonably lengthy pre-trial detention. THE LAW
6. The Court observes that the facts giving rise to the alleged violation of the Convention occurred prior to 16 September 2022, the date on which the Russian Federation ceased to be a party to the Convention. The Court therefore decides that it has jurisdiction to examine the present application (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‐73, 17 January 2023). 7. The applicant complained that his pre-trial detention had been unreasonably long. He relied on Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. 8. The Court observes that the general principles regarding the right to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial, as guaranteed by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention, have been stated in a number of its previous judgments (see, among many other authorities, Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 110, ECHR 2000‐XI, and McKay v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 543/03, §§ 41-44, ECHR 2006‐X, with further references). 9. In the leading case of Dirdizov v. Russia, no. 41461/10, 27 November 2012, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 10. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the the applicant’s pre-trial detention was unreasonably long. 11. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention. 12. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‐law (see, in particular, Pastukhov and Yelagin v. Russia, no. 55299/07, 19 December 2013), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum indicated in the appended table. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. Done in English, and notified in writing on 15 May 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court. Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention
(excessive length of pre-trial detention)
Application no. Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth

Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
Length of detention
Specific defects
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‐pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
2157/22
20/12/2021
Aleksey Nikolayevich KURKOV
1975

Kosarev Aleksandr Anatolyevich
Moscow
24/07/2020 to
30/10/2021
Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction
1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 7 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention
1,400

Application no. Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth

Representative’s name and location
Period of detention
Court which issued detention order/examined appeal
Length of detention
Specific defects
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‐pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
2157/22
20/12/2021
Aleksey Nikolayevich KURKOV
1975

Kosarev Aleksandr Anatolyevich
Moscow
24/07/2020 to
30/10/2021
Moscow City Court, First Appellate Court of General Jurisdiction
1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 7 day(s)

fragility of the reasons employed by the courts;
use of assumptions, in the absence of any evidentiary basis, of the risks of absconding or obstructing justice;
failure to conduct the proceedings with due diligence during the period of detention
1,400
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.