CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 18 décembre 2025
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1218DEC001294225
- Date
- 18 décembre 2025
- Publication
- 18 décembre 2025
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Dix requérants ont saisi la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme (CEDH) pour dénoncer la durée excessive des procédures pénales les concernant. Leurs griefs, fondés sur l'article 6 § 1 de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, ont été communiqués au gouvernement hongrois. Plusieurs requérants ont également invoqué d'autres griefs fondés sur les mêmes faits. Les parties ont conclu un règlement amiable, par lequel les requérants renoncent à toute réclamation ultérieure contre l'État hongrois en échange du versement d'une indemnité par celui-ci, sous réserve de conditions de paiement et d'intérêts en cas de retard.
Procédure
Les requêtes ont été jointes et examinées ensemble par la CEDH. Les déclarations de règlement amiable, signées par les parties, ont été reçues par la Cour. Celle-ci a vérifié que le règlement respectait les droits de l'homme tels que définis par la Convention et ses protocoles. Aucune raison n'a justifié la poursuite de l'examen des affaires.
Question juridique
La Cour européenne des droits de l'homme est-elle compétente pour examiner des requêtes fondées sur la durée excessive des procédures pénales et, dans l'affirmative, peut-elle homologuer un règlement amiable mettant fin à ces affaires ?
Solution
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 } .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 } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .s8E0918A8 { width:37.55pt; display:inline-block } .s7C2C4941 { width:149.75pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .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 } .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 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 12942/25 Imrich JÓNI against Hungary and 9 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 18   December 2025 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphane Pisani , President ,   Juha Lavapuro,   Hugh Mercer , 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 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 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, signed by the parties, 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 22 January 2026.     Attila Teplán   Stéphane Pisani   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 Year 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 (in euros) [1]     12942/25 14/04/2025 Imrich JÓNI 1982   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 17/11/2025 01/07/2025 2,000     14114/25 29/04/2025 Ildikó MÁTÉ 1994   Kiss Dalma Budapest   13/11/2025 28/10/2025 4,600     14380/25 30/04/2025 Szilárd ZAJÁROS 1972   Kiss Dániel Bálint Budapest Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 26/11/2025 11/08/2025 5,200     17446/25 05/06/2025 Alex MILÁK 1998   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 20/11/2025 15/10/2025 3,300     18191/25 02/06/2025 József VIDÁK 1969   Háromszéki Bence Győr Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 12/11/2025 25/09/2025 6,800     18857/25 02/06/2025 Ferenc RAFAEL 1995   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings   12/11/2025 21/10/2025 2,600     19394/25 17/06/2025 Péter TAKÁCS 1972   Enzsöl Péter Budapest Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 20/11/2025 17/11/2025 3,900     19984/25 27/06/2025 Ferenc LAKATOS 1978   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 03/11/2025 18/11/2025 2,000     20632/25 16/06/2025 Anna HORVÁTH 1947   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 20/11/2025 14/10/2025 2,000   20636/25 14/06/2025 Attila DÁNYI 1993   Szabó Gábor Göd Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings 14/11/2025 15/10/2025 2,600   [1] 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
- 26
- Date
- 18 décembre 2025
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2025:1218DEC001294225
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral