4.  The applicant was born in 1971 and lived in Volgograd prior to his arrest. 5.  On 31 January 2003 the applicant was arrested and charged with theft and the use of forged identity documents. Two days later he was remanded in custody. 6.  On 6 April 2004 the Dzerzhinskiy District Court of Volgograd found him guilty as charged and sentenced him to three years and six months’ imprisonment. On 27 July 2004 the Volgograd Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal. 7.  In the meantime, criminal proceedings against the applicant and five other individuals were instituted on the charges of participation in a criminal syndicate, several counts of aggravated robbery, inflicting serious injuries and two counts of murder. On 12 April 2004 the case went to trial. 8.  On 26 June 2009 the Volgograd Regional Court found the defendants guilty, on the basis of a jury verdict. The applicant was sentenced to eighteen years’ imprisonment in a high-security institution. On 18 March 2010 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the conviction on appeal. 9.  Between 2 February 2003 and 25 April 2010 the applicant was held in remand prison IZ-34/1 in the Volgograd Region. From 30 November to 26 December 2006 and from 16 March to 23 April 2009 the applicant was transferred to a penitentiary medical facility in the Volgograd Region where he received treatment for tuberculosis. 10.  The prison was severely overcrowded. Thus, cell 41 measuring 20 sq. m was equipped with 16 sleeping places and accommodated up to 30 inmates; cell 64 measuring 10 sq. m was designed for 6 and housed up to 16 individuals; furthermore, cell 70 measuring 16 sq. m presented 6 places and up to 15 detainees who occupied them. 11.  In addition, the applicant complained about the following aspects of the detention: detainees had to use a hole in the floor as a toilet; cells were equipped with lavatory pans for the first time in 2008. Until 2010, there had been no partitions between toilets and the living space. Hot water was not available. 12.  The applicant brought an action before the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for compensation for a breach of his right to a trial within a reasonable time. He relied on the new Compensation Act (see below). 13.  By decision of 29 September 2010, the Supreme Court instructed the applicant to supply additional information and documents by 22 October 2010. On 27 October 2010 the Supreme Court disallowed the applicant’s action because the information had not been received. 14.  The applicant challenged the decision of 27 October 2010 on appeal. He submitted that the requested information and documents had been sent to the Supreme Court on 19 October 2010. 15.  On 28 December 2010 the Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court rejected the appeal, finding that the applicant’s submission had been belated because they had only reached the court on 29 October 2010.