CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 17 mai 2023

.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 } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6C5BED22 { margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s46DB5BA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .s8E0918A8 { width:37.55pt; display:inline-block } .s5AAEE4F1 { width:148.75pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; 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 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .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 }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 26965/21 Árpád SZABÓ against Hungary and 11 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 17 May 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková , President ,   Gilberto Felici,   Raffaele Sabato , judges , and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, 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”). THE LAW Joinder of the applications Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings) In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the protractedness of the proceedings. In particular, the Court has found that an effective remedy is available in Hungary to provide redress for the alleged grievances (see Szaxon v. Hungary (dec.), no. 54421/21, 21 March 2023). However, the applicants have not availed themselves of this legal avenue. In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §§   1 and   4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 8 June 2023.     Attila Teplán   Alena Poláčková   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Start of proceedings End of proceedings Total length Levels of jurisdiction     26965/21 17/05/2021 Árpád SZABÓ 1945     03/07/2013   08/12/2020   7 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 6 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction       33063/21 15/06/2021 LAVINAMIX ÉPÍTŐ KFT. 1995 Csaba Árpád Vac 28/09/2009   30/03/2021   11 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 3   day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction       33465/21 09/06/2021 István KIS HORVÁTH 1953 Kiss Balázs Budapest 03/04/2015   22/02/2021   5 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 20 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction       38028/21 20/07/2021 Judit Éva DOMOSZLAI 1928 Gere Dávid Budapest 24/04/2014   19/01/2021   6 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 27 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction       38538/21 02/06/2021 Household Mónika GYŐRI 1968 Ibolya GYŐRI 1972       05/12/2010   23/02/2021   10 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 19 day(s) 4 level(s) of jurisdiction       38902/21 23/07/2021 Helga VASS 1970 Nemess Lívia Budapest 27/12/2017   31/05/2021   3 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 5 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction       38927/21 23/07/2021 Csilla Emese HEGYI 1964 Kiss D. Csaba Budapest 17/03/2017   23/11/2021   4 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 7 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction       38932/21 28/07/2021 Miklós KOVÁCS 1950 Gerencsér Éva Budapest 22/05/2014   06/01/2021   6 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 16 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction     39893/21 04/08/2021 Csaba KÓSA 1974 Gerencsér Éva Budapest 18/06/2014   09/11/2021   7 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 23 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction     40739/21 03/08/2021 Melinda KETESDY 1968 Czirmes György Budapest 09/10/2015   15/06/2021   5 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 7 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction     43327/21 18/08/2021 Imréné KARDOS 1953 X. Pál Zoltán Budapest 08/06/2009   27/01/2021   11 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 20 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction     43576/21 25/08/2021 Norbert TÓVÁRI 1972 Károly László Budapest 15/05/2009   25/02/2021   11 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 11 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction