On 14 July 1998 the same case was again registered under number 12 C 211/98.

    The applicant contends that his detention lasted unreasonably long and that, as a result, it had a punitive character.

    On the same day and on 23 August 2001 it held further hearings. Evidence was heard from the applicant again.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time (Article   29 § 3). 4.

The applicant had the same counsel in the District Court and in the Court of Appeal.

It was also decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the applications at the same time (Article 29 § 1). THE FACTS I.     THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 5.

    On the same day the applicant was arrested on suspicion of involvement in the attack.

As concerned the applicant, it appeared that he had borrowed SEK 40,000,000 from the company and commissioned it to buy stocks for the same amount on his behalf.

At the same time, it invited the claimants to present documentary evidence. 10.

On the same day V. was diagnosed with meningococcosis. She was transferred to an intensive care unit, where she died shortly afterwards.

On 16 February 2013 the case was closed again, with the same conclusion. The decision to terminate the investigation relied on the same evidence, with the addition of the two witness statements.

On the same date the applicant was questioned in the capacity of the accused. 11.

However, on 11 February 1998 the applicant requested that the hearing be postponed as his lawyer had to participate in a hearing of a criminal case at the same time.

In July of the same year fresh elections took place.

   The Commission notes that the two applicants have submitted separate complaints in relation to facts by which they were both affected in the same or a similar way.

They have therefore already lasted 5 years, 2 months and 3 days.

A further adjournment was ordered on 3 March 1993 for the same reason.

    On the same date the applicant lodged an appeal with the Athens Criminal Court of Appeal challenging the court’s findings and its evaluation of the evidence, which was scheduled for hearing

  The Constitutional Court established that even though the impugned proceedings had lasted seven years and eight months, they were very complex and the applicant largely contributed to its length

The entire proceedings thus lasted three years and almost three months.