CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 12 novembre 1986

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }  The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 12 November 1986, the following members being present:                       MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President                         G. SPERDUTI                         F. ERMACORA                         E. BUSUTTIL                         G. JÖRUNDSSON                         B. KIERNAN                         A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                         A. WEITZEL                         J.C. SOYER                         H. DANELIUS                         G. BATLINER                     Mrs G.H. THUNE                     Sir Basil HALL                     Mr. F. MARTINEZ                       Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission   Having regard to Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;   Having regard to the application introduced on 29 June 1984 by R. sen., R. jun., G. and R. against Austria and registered on 6 September 1984 under file No. 11131/84;   Having regard to   -        the Commission's decision of 6 May 1985 to bring the application to the notice of the respondent Government and to invite them to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application;   -        the observations submitted by the respondent Government on 14 August 1985 and the reply thereto submitted by the applicants on 16 September 1985;   -        the Commission's decision of 5 March 1986 to invite the parties to an oral hearing on the admissibility and merits of the application;   -        the Commission's decision of 6 October 1986 to cancel the hearing in the light of the parties' information that they were engaged in negotiations with a view to reaching an agreed solution of the case, and that such a solution had in principle been reached;   -        the parties' joint declaration of 10 November 1986 requesting the Commission, in the light of the agreed solution, to strike the application off its list of cases;   Having deliberated;   Decides as follows:   THE FACTS   The first applicant, born in 1933, is the owner of gravel workings. The second applicant, born in 1960, is an employee.   The third applicant, born in 1955, is a hotel proprietor.   The fourth applicant, born in 1958, is an employee.   All applicants are Austrian citizens. The first, third and fourth applicants reside at Fischamend whereas the second applicant resides at Saalbach.   Before the Commission they are represented by Dr. W. Weiss, a lawyer practising in Vienna.   On 6 December 1973 the Vienna Airport Operations Company Ltd. (Flughafen Wien Betriebsgesellschaft m.b.H.) filed with the Lower Austria Government a request for expropriation of 153.478 sqm of property around the Vienna Schwechat airport.   This property belonged to the first applicant and his father.   On 5 August 1974 the Governor (Landeshauptmann) determined in an expropriation decree the object and the extent of the expropriation.   On 5 December 1974 the airport company lodged with the Schwechat District Court (Bezirksgericht) an application for determination of the amount of compensation due to the first applicant and his father. At a hearing on 5 May 1975 the first applicant requested compensation of 960,- AS per sqm, and his father of altogether 15.056.873,- AS. Two expert opinions were then prepared. In its judgment of 21 April 1976 the Court awarded 5.601.947,- AS each to the first applicant and his father, i.e. altogether 11.203.894,- AS or 73.- per sqm.   The subsequent appeal (Rekurs) of the first applicant and his father was partly upheld by the Vienna Regional Court (Landesgericht) on 9 September 1976 insofar as the applicants had claimed an additional amount of compensation.   The further appeal (Revisionsrekurs) of the airport company was dismissed by the Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof) on 3 February 1977.   On 2 January 1977 the first applicant's father died.   In his will he appointed his son and his grandchildren as universal heirs. The second, third and fourth applicants then entered the proceedings as successors in title.   Following the decision of the Supreme Court, proceedings were resumed before the District Court.   Hearings were then held on 28 December 1977, 26 June 1978 and 19 March 1979.   On 19 September 1980 disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the judge who was eventually transferred to another court on 8 January 1981.   In the ensuing months hearings were held on 5 May and 30 June 1981 and a third expert opinion was prepared.   A fourth expert was then appointed who prepared an opinion on 25 March 1982 and later also a supplementary opinion.   He concluded in the opinion that the compensation due to the applicants amounted to 21.664.637,- AS or 20.824.769,- AS, depending on certain further criteria.   On 26 July 1983 the District Court passed its judgment of 37 pages. It found on the basis of the opinion of the fourth expert that the compensation due to the applicants, which corresponded to the market value of the properties, amounted to 11.773.187,- AS, in addition to the sum awarded previously by the same court.   Both the airport company's and the applicants' appeals against this decision were dismissed by the Vienna Regional Court on 14 December 1983.   The decision was served on 5 January 1984.   COMPLAINTS   The applicants complained under Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention of the length of the proceedings which lasted over nine years.   They also complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1) and submitted that in view of the period of time between the expropriation and the compensation award a valorisation of the property corresponding to the decrease of the value of money should have taken place, or that they should have received interest on the amount of compensation.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION   The application was introduced on 29 June 1984 and registered on 6 September 1984.   On 6 May 1985 the Commission decided to bring the application to the notice of the respondent Government and to invite them to submit written observations on its admissibility and merits pursuant to Rule 42, para. 2, sub-para. b of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.   The Government's observations were submitted on 14 August 1985 and the reply thereto submitted by the applicants on 16 September 1985.   On 5 March 1986 the Commission decided in accordance with Rule 42 para. 3 (b) of the Rules of Procedure to invite the parties to submit further observations orally at a hearing on the admissibility and merits of the application.   The hearing was scheduled for 10 October 1986.   The respondent Government and the applicants informed the Commission on 1 and 3 October 1986, respectively, that they were engaged in negotiations with a view to reaching an agreed solution of the case and that such a solution had in principle been reached, for which reason they requested the Commission to cancel the hearing.   On 6 October 1986 the Commission decided to cancel the hearing.   On 10 November 1986 the parties jointly declared that on account of a domestic agreed solution and in view of the satisfaction of the applicants' claims (Klaglosstellung), the four applicants would withdraw their application on the condition that the respondent Government pay the amount of two million AS.   However, in order for the agreed solution to become effective, it was necessary that the Commission struck the application off its list of cases.   Accordingly, the parties requested the Commission to do so.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION   The Commission notes that the applicants have withdrawn their application after a solution has been found with the respondent Government which satisfies the applicants' claims.   The Commission finds that in these circumstances there are no reasons of a general character affecting the observance of the Convention which require further examination of the application.   For these reasons, the Commission   DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.   Secretary to the Commission               President of the Commission          (H.C. KRÜGER)                             (C.A. NØRGAARD)