CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG21
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 10 juillet 1991
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:1991:0710DEC001552089
- Date
- 10 juillet 1991
- Publication
- 10 juillet 1991
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.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 }                         Application No. 15520/89                       by Barbara FRIESSNIG                       against Austria             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 10 July 1991, the following members being present:                 MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President                   J.A. FROWEIN                   S. TRECHSEL                   F. ERMACORA                   G. SPERDUTI                   A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   J.-C. SOYER                   H.G. SCHERMERS                   H. DANELIUS              Mrs.   G. H. THUNE              Sir   Basil HALL              Mr.   C.L. ROZAKIS              Mrs.   J. LIDDY              MM.   L. LOUCAIDES                   J.-C. GEUS                   M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                   B. MARXER                Mr.   H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;           Having regard to the application introduced on 12 July 1989 by Barbara FRIESSNIG against Austria and registered on 19 September 1989 under file No. 15520/89;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:   THE FACTS           The applicant, a pharmacist, is an Austrian citizen, born in 1949 and living in Axams.   She is represented by Mrs.   E. Berchtold-Ostermann, a lawyer in Vienna.           The facts agreed between the parties may be summarised as follows.           In 1982 the applicant was granted a licence to run a pharmacy in Axams.   In 1985 the applicant's ex-husband laid criminal charges against her, leading to the institution of criminal investigations. In view of these proceedings another pharmacist was appointed on 1 October 1985 by the Innsbruck authorities to manage the applicant's pharmacy.           On 1 October 1987, the applicant was partly acquitted and was convicted by the Innsbruck Regional Court (Landesgericht) of breach of trust (Untreue) and aggravated professional fraud (gewerbsmässiger schwerer Betrug).   She was sentenced to one year's imprisonment.   The execution of the sentence was suspended on three years' probation.   The judgment became final.           Subsequently, disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the applicant which are still pending.           On 5 April 1987, the applicant was told that her request to be readmitted as manager of her pharmacy would not be decided pending the disciplinary proceedings.           The applicant stated that the Austrian Board of Pharmacists (Apothekerkammer) informed the competent authorities that the usual practice in similar cases was not to revoke the licence definitely before a decision was given in the disciplinary proceedings.   However, the Tirolean Regional Government (Landesregierung) instructed the District Authorities (Bezirkshauptmannschaft) on 5 April 1988 to withdraw the applicant's licence and the corresponding order was issued on 8 April 1988.           The applicant's appeal (Berufung) was rejected on 8 July 1988 by the Tirolean Regional Government.           The applicant then appealed to the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) which rejected her appeal on 13 December 1988 (decision served on 30 January 1989).           The Constitutional Court referred the matter to the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) which, on 20 April 1989, granted the applicant's request for suspensive effect (aufschiebende Wirkung).     COMPLAINTS           The applicant submitted that the proceedings before the Administrative Court and the Constitutional Court did not conform with Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention as a public oral hearing was not provided for under all circumstances, and as these Courts are bound by the facts as established by the administrative authorities and can only examine whether or not the administrative act complained of   violates constitutional law or, in the case of the Administrative Court, other legal provisions.   She further invoked Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention which she considered to be violated because the revocation of her licence deprived her of her means of existence.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION AND FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS           On 9 November 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government for observations on its admissibility and merits.   On 20 February 1990 the respondent Government submitted their observations and on 20 April 1990 the applicant replied.   On 10 July 1990 the respondent Government informed the Commission that the Austrian Administrative Court had, on 18 June 1990, quashed the administrative decision complained of by the applicant.   On 31 July 1990 the applicant replied that despite the Administrative Court's judgment she was still a victim of the alleged violations because the authorities still intended to withdraw her licence.   On 14 November 1990 the applicant wrote that her licence had been withdrawn again on 23 October 1990.   On 18 December 1990 the applicant informed the Commission that her appeal against the order of 23 October 1990 had been successful and that consequently she wished to withdraw her application.     REASONS FOR THE DECISION           The applicant has withdrawn the application and there are no reasons of a general character affecting respect for human rights, as defined in the Convention, which require the further examination of the case by virtue of Article 30 para. 1 in fine of the Convention.             For these reasons, the Commission unanimously           DECIDES TO STRIKE THE CASE OFF THE LIST OF CASES.       Secretary to the Commission                President of the Commission            (H.C. KRÜGER)                                (C.A. NØRGAARD)    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG
- Formation
- 21
- Date
- 10 juillet 1991
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:1991:0710DEC001552089
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral