CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 1 octobre 2015

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sF114237 { width:19.02pt; display:inline-block } .s26581B4D { width:197.63pt; display:inline-block } .s5B081A9D { width:168.28pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sE512A940 { font-family:Arial; color:#474747 } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s26725EEE { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sD8E76205 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no 68562/12 Gheorghe Dorin RĂCHITĂ against Romania and 6 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 1   October 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Valeriu Griţco, President,   Branko Lubarda,   Mārtiņš Mits, judges and Hasan Bakırcı, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the cases, 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 Court received friendly-settlement declarations under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Romania in respect of the facts giving rise to these applications, subject to an undertaking by the Government to pay them the amounts detailed in the appended table. These amounts will be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases. 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. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 22 October 2015.   Hasan Bakırcı   Valeriu Griţco 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 name Date of birth Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of Applicant’s declaration Amount for pecuniary, non-pecuniary damages and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     68562/12 11/10/2012 Gheorghe Dorin RĂCHITĂ 27/01/1972 20/05/2015 12/05/2015 3,000     26600/13 12/04/2013 Petre ŢIU 23/08/1968 04/05/2015 10/03/2015 4,700     56709/13 03/09/2013 Adrian Daniel Ionel TIMIȘ 15/12/1981 09/02/2015 02/06/2015 3,900     71337/13 08/11/2013 Gheorghe GRECU 07/07/1957 26/05/2015 18/05/2015 7,400     75982/13 26/11/2013 Daniel Liviu LITAN 05/07/1975 29/05/2015 11/03/2015 5,100     253/14 17/12/2013 Nistor Adrian STANCIU 01/12/1980 26/05/2015 18/05/2015 5,100     1133/14 19/12/2013 Nicolae FRANK 12/10/1945 12/05/2015 04/02/2015 3,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.