THIRD SECTION

CASE OF ZATYNAYKO AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA

(Applications nos. 21514/18 and 42 others –

see appended list)

JUDGMENT
(Revision)

STRASBOURG

6 March 2025

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Zatynayko and Others v. Russia (request for revision of the judgment of 14 December 2023),

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, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having deliberated in private on 13 February 2025,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1.  The case originated in applications against Russia lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates, including application no. 25090/19 lodged by Mr Yevgeniy Vladimorovich Zubtzov on 29 August 2019.

2.  In a judgment delivered on 14 December 2023, the Court held, inter alia, that there had been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the inadequate conditions of detention after conviction and a violation of Article 13 of the Convention on account of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in respect of several applications, including application no. 25090/19 lodged by Mr Zubtsov. The Court also decided to award Mr Zubtsov 12,500 euros (EUR) in respect of non-pecuniary damage.

3.  On 4 June 2024 the applicant’s representative Mr Petrov informed the Court that he had learned that Mr Zubtsov had died on 7 July 2023 and that Ms Tatyana Nikolayevna Yakhontova, the applicant’s mother and heir, had expressed a wish to pursue the application. He accordingly requested the revision of the judgment within the meaning of Rule 80 of the Rules of Court. The request was accompanied by the birth and death certificates, a certificate of succession and an authority form appointing Mr Petrov as the representative of Ms Yakhontova.

4.  On 5 December 2024 the Court considered the request for revision and decided to dispense with inviting the Government to submit observations, regard being had to the Government’s abstention from participation in the proceedings before it.

THE LAW

1. JURISDICTION AND CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE RESPONDENT GOVERNMENT

5.  The Court reiterates that it has jurisdiction to examine the present applications (see Fedotova and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 40792/10 and 2 others, §§ 68‑73, 17 January 2023). It further reiterates that the respondent Government are not released from the duty to cooperate with the Court. Nor is the Court prevented from continuing with the examination of applications where it retains jurisdiction (see Ukraine and the Netherlands v. Russia ((dec.) [GC], nos. 8019/16 and 2 others, §§ 435-39, 30 November 2022, and Svetova and Others v. Russia, no. 54714/17, §§ 29-31, 24 January 2023). The Court may draw such inferences as it deems appropriate from a party’s failure or refusal to participate effectively in the proceedings (Rule 44C of the Rules of Court).

2. THE REQUEST FOR REVISION

6.  The applicant’s representative requested revision of the judgment of 14 December 2023, which he had been unable to have executed because Mr Zubtsov had died before the judgment had been adopted. His mother Ms Yakhonotova, who was also his heir, should therefore receive the sum awarded to the deceased.

7.  Regard being had to circumstances of the present case and the relevant case-law on the issue (see Cangöz and Others v. Turkey (revision), no. 7469/06, § 9, 19 September 2017; M. Özel and Others v. Turkey (revision), nos. 14350/05 and 2 others, § 8, 31 March 2020; and Volchkova and Mironov v. Russia (revision), nos. 45668/05 and 2292/06, 9 March 2021), the Court considers that Ms Yakhontova has standing to receive the sum awarded in the judgment in her son’s stead.

8.  The Court considers that the judgment of 14 December 2023 should be revised pursuant to Rule 80 of the Rules of Court, the relevant parts of which provide:

“A party may, in the event of the discovery of a fact which might by its nature have a decisive influence and which, when a judgment was delivered, was unknown to the Court and could not reasonably have been known to that party, request the Court ... to revise that judgment.

...”

9.  The Court accordingly decides to award Ms Yakhontova the amount it previously awarded to Mr Zubtsov, namely EUR 12,500 for non-pecuniary damage.

10.  The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

1. Decides to revise its judgment in the case of Zatynayko and Others v. Russia of 14 December 2023, as regards application Zubtsov v. Russia (application no. 25090/19), in so far as it concerns the application of Article 41 of the Convention;
2. Holds, accordingly,

(a)  that the respondent State is to pay Ms Tatyana Yakhontova, Mr Yevgeniy Zubstov’s heir, within three months, EUR 12,500 (twelve thousand and five hundred euros) in respect of non-pecuniary damage, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable;

(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 6 March 2025, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

 Viktoriya Maradudina Diana Kovatcheva
 Deputy Section Registrar President

APPENDIX