CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 25 novembre 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s79B8843C { margin-top:60pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sE207830C { margin-top:54pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } Communicated on 25 November 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 27368/19 L.A. against Russia lodged on 26 April 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a situation of domestic violence (see Volodina v.   Russia , no. 41261/17, 9 July 2019). In 2016, the applicant’s brother assaulted her and broke her finger. The investigation took longer than two years and was discontinued after the prosecution had become time-barred. The applicant indicates that the wording of procedural decisions and statements by the investigator which questioned her mental health suggested a stereotyped approach to domestic violence as being a “private matter”. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     As regards the alleged violations of Articles 3, 8 and 13 of the Convention in connection with the assault on the applicant, did the Russian authorities discharge the obligation to conduct an effective and diligent investigation into the incident?   2.     As regards the alleged violation of Article 14 of the Convention, taken in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8, did the applicant establish that she was the victim of individual prejudice on account of her sex (see Volodina , cited above, § 114)?