CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 16 mars 2017
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0316DEC000004813
- Date
- 16 mars 2017
- Publication
- 16 mars 2017
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
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s53915289 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; color:#c00000 } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s701081D1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:left } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s5A29A8C7 { width:12.53pt; display:inline-block } .sC6271ACD { width:186.41pt; display:inline-block } .s2055D3B3 { width:16.54pt; display:inline-block } .s7C039683 { width:226.45pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7FDD75C9 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.2pt; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sCC018295 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION This version was rectified on 19 May under Rule 81 of the Rules of Court.   Application no. 48/13 Györgyné KOBZA and others against Hungary and 3 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 16   March 2017 as a Committee composed of:   Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,   Egidijus Kūris,   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, judges, and Karen Reid, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). In some of the applications, complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention. The Court received friendly-settlement declarations under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Hungary in respect of the facts giving rise to these applications, subject to an undertaking by the Government to pay them the amounts detailed in the appended table. These amounts will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   39 of the Convention.   Done in English and notified in writing on 6 April 2017.   Karen Reid   Vincent A. De Gaetano   Registrar   President APPENDIX No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant name Date of birth Representative name and location Date of receipt of Government declaration Date of receipt of Applicant’s declaration Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant/household (in euros) [i]     48/13 12/12/2012 (66 applicants) Györgyné Kobza 10/10/1935 József Mihályné Balogh 12/06/1940 Attila István Bekó 07/02/1971 György Bekó 02/09/1960 István Bekó 06/10/1972 József Bekó 17/10/1936 Istvánné Bertók 20/01/1941 Mónika Cselőtei 27/01/1970 Julianna Csizmadia 22/09/1954 Györgyné Dudás 01/12/1954 István Fabián 13/09/1948 Károlyné Gast 09/03/1956 Józsefné H. Molnár 27/01/1933 Attila Juhász 26/01/1976 Ferenc Juhász 09/01/1951 Sándorné Kalvach 03/12/1949 Sándorné Kiss 17/12/1947 Ferenc Kurucz 04/10/1950 József Kurucz 17/09/1953 Tiborné Ligeti 17/08/1953 Ferencné Márton 14/11/1955 József Molnár 21/08/1962 Mária Molnár 23/04/1957 Valéria Erzsébet Murai 27/12/1947 József Naszádi 23/02/1937 Ágnes Pásztor 21/04/1984 László Pásztor 17/03/1987 Krisztina Reinerné Weisz 21/04/1977 Árpád Józsefné Richter 10/09/1957 Mária Rudolfné dr. Katona 04/10/1956 Lászlóné Sas 08/09/1950 Ferenc Sikter 24/08/1945 György Sikter 03/05/1950 László Sikter 01/11/1948 Jánosné Stegmajer 04/01/1973 Jánosné Szolga 10/06/1931 György Tóth 03/01/1952 Mária Tóth 27/05/1954 Pálné Tóth 11/08/1928 Jánosné Varga 07/09/1954 Zoltán Varga 16/06/1972 Gyuláné Vaskó 19/05/1955 István Verebes 12/03/1966 László Weisz 27/05/1968 Róbertné Wittmann 27/09/1959 Erzsébet Zana 27/05/1960 Imre Zvonorics 15/07/1955   Household Ferenc Balogh 11/02/1940 Ferencné Balogh 29/03/1939   Household László Horgász 31/10/1981 Monika Horgász 04/02/1973   Household Lajos Kalmár 24/11/1983 Zsolt Kalmár 20/10/1978     Household György Kobza 25/04/1960 Györgyné Kobza 11/02/1960   Household Erzsébet Molnár 28/05/1977 Krisztina Molnár 26/02/1979   Household Ferenc Naszádi 10/08/1979 Sára Naszádi 21/07/1980   Household István Pásztor 30/04/1945 István Pásztor 27/09/1972 Istvánné Pásztor 17/10/1952   Household Ferenc Varga 24/11/1949 Ferencné Varga 14/09/1953   Household Sándor Varga 25/08/1969 Sándor János Varga 11/12/1941   Hangyál Edit Budapest 24/10/2016 14/12/2016 2,000     21619/13 21/03/2013 Edit Kolman 30/03/1961     10/01/2017 25/07/2016 8,000 [1]     30286/13 29/04/2013 Ibolya Jáhn 07/09/1953 Kőfalvi Balázs Budapest 21/11/2016 02/11/2016 6,000     64262/13 18/09/2013 Edit Kolman 30/03/1961     18/01/2017 09/08/2016 15,000 [2]   [1] Rectified on 19 May 2017: the amount was 6,000 [2] Rectified on 19 May 2017: the amount was 6,000 [i] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 28
- Date
- 16 mars 2017
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2017:0316DEC000004813
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral