CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 7 mai 2026

.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 } .sA43C3626 { width:28.35pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s329183A { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-size:14pt; text-transform:uppercase } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .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 } .s38800CDB { width:37.55pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s50F90984 { width:149.75pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s935FFEBF { width:7.54pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .sDCEB1D12 { width:138.09pt; font-family:Arial; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s2BE4053 { width:4.4%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s284B6F6A { width:11.14%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA2A199E4 { width:20%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sBFA24E6A { width:12.24%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s525BA485 { width:16.66%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s5EC7BACA { width:14.46%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA620FAF2 { width:21.12%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sF314C99F { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sAB95A5CB { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sBB8C798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .s1B96964 { width:4.4%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 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 } .sB881D26E { width:11.14%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA5A8FF9B { width:20%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s46C7E1B1 { width:12.24%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF92231EF { width:16.66%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s19E16FBF { width:14.46%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s51D226D5 { width:21.12%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.4pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .fixListIndent { list-style-position: inside }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 759/25 Gábor Józsefné KARDOS and Others against Hungary and 3 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7   May 2026 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 against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of 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”). 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. After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article   37 of the Convention. The Government acknowledged the excessive length of civil proceedings. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would 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 undertook 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 applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declarations. The Court observes that Article   37 §   1   (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if: “... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. Thus, it may strike out applications under Article   37 §   1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v.   Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no.   26307/95, §§   75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI). The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Gazsó v. Hungary, no. 48322/12, 16 July 2015 and Csatári and Others v. Hungary [Committee], no. 18514/24, 20 May 2025). Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1   (c)). In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1 in   fine ). Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article   37 §   2 of the Convention ( Josipović v.   Serbia (dec.), no.   18369/07, 4   March 2008). 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; Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 28 May 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 civil proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth / Date of registration Representative’s name and location Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     759/25 16/12/2024 (6 applicants) Gábor Józsefné KARDOS 1957 Gábor BAKAITY 1976 Attila LÁSZLÓ 1976 Szabolcs NÉMETH 1981 Sándor SZALAI 1969 Ilona VARGA 1946   Incze Gergely Budapest 16/02/2026 13/03/2026 200     2360/25 16/12/2024 (10 applicants) Eszter CSÁNYINÉ PATAKI 1974 Józsefné DOBRIK 1946 Kristóf Gergely EINSPACH 1983 Olivér EINSPACH 1984 Ferenc GASZT 1968 Nándorné GUNYHÓ 1944 Istvánné HORVÁTH 1955 Pálné ISTVÁN 1975 Judit MARÓTI 1976 Bernadett SZABÓNÉ HORVÁTH 1976   Kodela Viktor Budapest 02/02/2026 06/03/2026 200     9775/25 12/03/2025 (9 applicants) Gábor FERENCSÁK 1974 Lajos LENGYEL 1956 Tibor MATTYASOVSZKY 1953 Csaba Egon MIHÁLYI 1971 Béla NAGY 1958 Zoltán PAP 1971 Ferenc RÖNKÖS 1955 László VADAS 1965 Gyula VERES 1964   Váczi Péter Győr 10/12/2025   200     19296/25 17/06/2025 (9 applicants) Éva BUSI 1957 Nándor György BLATNYÁK 1942 Mihályné DÉR 1952   Zoltán Béla EGRI 1945 HILLTOP LOGISZTIKAI KFT 2001 Gábor KROPOK 1966 Erzsébet Emese MELEGHNÉ SZKLADÁNYI 1951 SALDO ZRT 1993 TRANS-SPED KFT 1998   Kovács N. Réka Budapest 05/02/2026 05/03/2026 200   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.