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 ÂŁ1, 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 >> Gazsó v. Hungary - 48322/12 - Legal Summary [2015] ECHR 776 (16 July 2015)<META NAME="HUDOC_No" CONTENT=002-10671"> URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2015/776.html Cite as: [2015] ECHR 776 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Information Note on the Court’s case-law 187
July 2015
Gazsó v. Hungary - 48322/12
Judgment 16.7.2015 [Section II] See: [2015] ECHR 685
Article 46
Pilot judgment
Respondent State required to introduce effective domestic remedy for complaints of the length of civil proceedings before the domestic courts
Facts - In his application to the European Court the applicant complained of the length of civil proceedings he had been involved in before the domestic courts and of the lack of an effective domestic remedy in such cases.
Law - The Court found, unanimously, violations of Article 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention on account of the length of the domestic proceedings and the lack of an effective domestic remedy in that regard.
Article 41: EUR 1,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
Article 46: From Hungary’s accession to the Convention system and up to 1 May 2015, more than 200 judgments had involved the finding of a violation by Hungary concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings and the Government had also concluded friendly settlements and submitted unilateral declarations in numerous other cases. A further 400 cases against Hungary concerning the same issue were pending before the Court. It followed that the violations that had been found in the applicant’s case were neither prompted by an isolated incident nor attributable to a particular turn of events, but were the consequence of shortcomings of the respondent State. Accordingly, the situation had to be qualified as resulting from a practice incompatible with the Convention.
It was appropriate to apply the pilot judgment procedure, given notably the recurrent and persistent nature of the underlying problems, the number of people affected and the need to grant speedy and appropriate redress at the domestic level. Hungary was required to introduce without delay, and at the latest within one year of the judgment becoming final, a remedy or combination of remedies in the national legal system in respect of the problem of the length of civil proceedings in Hungary. Any similar new cases introduced after the judgment became final would be adjourned for one year pending implementation of the relevant measures by the respondent State.
