BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
European Court of Human Rights |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> KALOVICS v. HUNGARY - 46030/18 (Judgment : Article 6 - Right to a fair trial : Fourth Section Committee) [2019] ECHR 630 (19 September 2019) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2019/630.html Cite as: CE:ECHR:2019:0917JUD004094214, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0917JUD004094214, [2019] ECHR 630, CE:ECHR:2019:0919JUD004603018, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2019:0919JUD004603018 |
[New search] [Contents list] [Help]
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF KÁLOVICS v. HUNGARY
( Application no. 46030/18 )
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
19 September 2019
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Kálovics v. Hungary ,
The European Court of Human Rights ( Fourth Section ), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström , President,
Georges Ravarani ,
Jolien Schukking , judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt , Acting
Deputy Section Registrar
,
THE FACTS
4. The applicant ' s details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table. 5. The applicant complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings . He also raised other complaints under the provisions of the Convention.THE LAW
Article 6 § 1
"In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a ... hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ..."
7. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII). 8. In the leading case of Gazsó v. Hungary, no. 48322/12, 16 July 2015, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case. 9. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the "reasonable time" requirement. 10. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention."If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party."
16. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case - law, the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum indicated in the appended table. 17. The Court considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT , UNANIMOUSLY,
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 19 September 2019 , pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv Tigerstedt Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
( excessive length of civil proceedings )
Date of introduction |
Applicant ' s name Date of birth
|
Representative ' s name and location |
Start of proceedings |
End of proceedings |
Total length Levels of jurisdiction |
Other complaints under well-established case-law |
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1] |
23/09/2018 |
Tamás Kálovics 19/11/1977 |
Horgos Lívia Budapest |
27/07/2010
|
08/05/2018
|
7 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 12 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction
|
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings. |
3,400 |
[1] . Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants .