CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 20 juin 2019

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s6F7FC1B9 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sD407E162 { width:116.42pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .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 Application no. 39211/13 László PÜSKI against Hungary and 9 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 20   June 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,   Georges Ravarani,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy 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 criminal proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). In application no. 39211/13, the applicant also complained under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective remedy. 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 converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 11 July 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of criminal proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Date of birth   Representative’s name and location Other complaints under well-established case-law   Date of receipt of Government’s 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]     39211/13 07/06/2013 László Püski 13/11/1958 Galló István Budapest Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 03/05/2019 20/11/2018 2,500     12752/18 08/03/2018 István Vörös 29/05/1953 Kalló Péter Budapest   03/05/2019 03/01/2019 6,000     42914/18 31/08/2018 Household Norbert Takács 01/04/1989 Tamás Takács 01/12/1957 Hatlaczki Gyula Nagykáta   16/04/2019 25/03/2019 3,000     42949/18 30/08/2018 Szilvia Veresné Sonkoly 05/01/1977 Petőfi Sándor Miskolc   09/04/2019 02/04/2019 3,500     47251/18 27/09/2018 Róbertné Bogdán 24/02/1974 Kanyó Péter Nagykáta   09/04/2019 04/02/2019 15,000     50099/18 18/10/2018 Erika Lukácsi 17/01/1976 Hadnagy József Budapest   15/04/2019 21/05/2019 3,500     50461/18 15/10/2018 Zsolt Porkoláb 05/04/1969       26/02/2019 25/03/2019 3,500     52395/18 19/10/2018 Tibor Attila Balázs 14/04/1972 Hadnagy József Budapest   09/04/2019 21/05/2019 3,500     52409/18 16/10/2018 Gyula Gáspár 11/02/1992 Kanyó Péter Nagykáta   16/05/2019 09/05/2019 6,500   5488/19 17/01/2019 Erika Sajtosné Tóth 07/03/1971 Kecskés Ákos Zoltán Hódmezővásárhely   10/05/2019 15/05/2019 3,300   [i] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.