The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5 February 2026 as a Committee composed of: Diana Kovatcheva, President, Canòlic Mingorance Cairat, Vasilka Sancin, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications against the Hellenic Republic 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 indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented by Mr Ladis Charilaos and Ms Daliani...
THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 21984/22 Vasilios MOSCHONAS against Greece and 14 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 5 February 2026 as a Committee composed of: Diana Kovatcheva, President, Canòlic Mingorance Cairat, Vasilka Sancin, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications against the Hellenic Republic 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 indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to these declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented by Mr Ladis Charilaos and Ms Daliani Marina, two lawyers practising in Athens. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Greek Government (“the Government”). In all the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under Article 13 of the Convention. The Government submitted declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications. The Government acknowledged the inadequate conditions of detention at the Korydallos Prison. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts
MOSCHONAS v. GREECE AND OTHER APPLICATIONS DECISION 2 detailed in the appended table, provided that the applicants “have not been awarded any compensation for the same reason under Article 6A of the [Greek] Penitentiary Code or any other remedy, taking into consideration the duration of their detention in Korydallos I Detention Facility in such conditions”. They invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would 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 undertook 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 applicants informed the Court that they agreed to the terms of the declarations. 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 finds that, following the applicants’ express agreement to the terms of the dec...