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. 43782/21 Edit LOVESTYÁN against Hungary and 10 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 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     43782/21 19/08/2021 Edit LOVESTYÁN 1970 Pivarnyikné Juhász Emőke Budapest 23/07/2015   18/05/2021   5 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 26 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction     47512/21 08/09/2021 Péter János BURDON 1966 Keglovics Andrea Szekesfehervar 08/07/2013   04/02/2021   7 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 28 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction     48774/21 24/09/2021 Kinga Mária RÉPAI 1966 Kiss D. Csaba Budapest 13/09/2016   07/12/2021   5 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 25 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction     48820/21 21/09/2021 (4 applicants) Household Vivien KISS 1992 Petra KISS 2001 Péter KISS 1968 Péterné KISS 1972 Szűcs Péter Budapest 30/01/2013   24/03/2021   8 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 25 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction       48837/21 27/09/2021 Bíró Ilona KARVALICSNÉ 1957 Szabó Gábor Göd 25/11/2015   24/06/2021   5 year(s) and 7 month(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction     48843/21 28/09/2021 Tünde KESZÁN-DOPITA 1970 Sallay András Szigetszentmiklós 19/10/2015   08/04/2021   5 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 21 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction     51478/21 12/10/2021 Brigitta KNAPIG 1985 Szűcs Péter Budapest 09/07/2012   16/06/2021   8 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 8 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction     51506/21 15/10/2021 Ferencné BÁDOGOS 1963 Gerencsér Éva Budapest 01/10/2013   02/03/2021   7 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 2 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction     660/22 17/12/2021 Ilona GALBÁCSNÉ ORVOS 1959 Cech András Budapest 26/07/2010   05/10/2021   11 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 10 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction   8523/22 19/08/2021 Mária LOVESTYÁN 1967 Pivarnyikné Juhász Emőke Budapest 23/07/2015   18/05/2021   5 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 26 day(s) 2 level(s) of jurisdiction   19775/22 13/04/2022 Zoltán Lajos PIGNICZKI 1961 Stern Sándor Szentes 16/02/2016   06/07/2022   6 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 21 day(s) 3 level(s) of jurisdiction