Background
Three applicants complained about conditions in Korydallos prison. Stavros Koukouras was detained there from May 2016 to March 2022, Theodoros Kalfakakos from September 2015 to May 2017, and Fabian Rrycka from September 2016 to August 2018.
Koukouras and Rrycka alleged that they were held in 9.5-square-metre cells shared by three or four detainees, leaving each with less than 3 square metres of personal space. The Government gave a more favourable account of the usable cell space but acknowledged the relevant occupancy levels and periods of overcrowding at the prison.
The applicants also invoked Article 13, alleging no effective remedy for poor detention conditions. Koukouras separately challenged the lawfulness of his detention under Article 5 § 1. The representative did not supply requested updated information concerning Kalfakakos.
The Court’s Holding
The Court struck out Kalfakakos’s part of the application under Article 37 § 1 (a), finding that it was no longer justified to continue examining it after the requested information was not provided.
For Koukouras and Rrycka, the Court held that the Government’s own submissions established that each had less than 3 square metres of personal space throughout the relevant detention. It also noted acknowledged overcrowding and corroborating CPT and Ministry of Justice material. Their detention conditions were therefore inadequate and violated Article 3.
The Court found it unnecessary to examine the Article 13 complaint separately because the main legal question had been resolved. It rejected Koukouras’s Article 5 § 1 complaint as inadmissible or disclosing no appearance of a Convention violation. It awarded Koukouras EUR 12,500 and Rrycka EUR 8,100 for non-pecuniary damage, plus EUR 1,000 jointly for costs and expenses.
Key Takeaways
- Detention with less than 3 square metres of personal space was decisive evidence of inadequate conditions under Article 3.
- Official admissions of occupancy levels and corroborating institutional evidence supported the overcrowding finding.
- The Court struck out one applicant’s claim for failure to pursue it, while granting relief to the two applicants whose Article 3 complaints remained before it.
Why It Matters
The judgment applies the Court’s established approach to prison overcrowding at Korydallos: severe shortages of personal space can themselves establish degrading detention conditions, particularly when confirmed by the State’s occupancy evidence.
It also illustrates the Court’s streamlined treatment of related remedies complaints once it has found the substantive Article 3 violation, and its willingness to strike out an individual application where the applicant no longer appears to be pursuing it.