CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 mars 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; 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 } Communicated on 26 March 2020 Published on 18 May 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 80697/12 Platon Leonidovich LEBEDEV against Russia lodged on 12 December 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the refusal of compensation for two periods of pre-trial detention which the domestic courts found to have been unlawful. The claim for compensation in respect of non-pecuniary damage was dismissed on the grounds that the applicant was unable to produce a criminal conviction of the judge who had issued the unlawful detention orders (final decisions: Moscow City Court, 22 July and 24 August 2012). QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have an enforceable right to compensation under Article 5 § 5 of the Convention in respect of two periods of pre-trial detention which the domestic courts pronounced to have been unlawful (see Stadnik v. Russia , no. 41509/06, § 21, 13 June 2017, and Abashev v. Russia , no. 9096/09, §§ 40-42, 27 June 2013)?