CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;SCREENINGPANEL;ENG — 11 avril 1997

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }          In the case of Lennart Gustafsson v. Sweden (1),           The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights, constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2), _______________ Notes by the Registrar   1.   The case is numbered 148/1996/769/966.   The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).   The last two numbers indicate the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications to the Commission.   2.   Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9). ________________           Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 21 February 1997, and composed of the following judges:           Mr   C. Russo, Chairman,         Mr   A. Spielmann,         Mrs E. Palm,   and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,           Having regard to the application against the Kingdom of Sweden lodged with the Court on 23 October 1996 by a Swedish national, Mr Lennart Gustafsson, within the three-month period laid down by Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 of the Convention (art. 32-1, art. 47);           Whereas Sweden has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court (Article 46 of the Convention (art. 46)) and ratified Protocol No. 9 to the Convention (P9), Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) so as to enable a person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights ("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;           Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) of the Convention (art. 48-1-a, art. 48-1-d);           Having regard to the Commission's report of 4 September 1996 on the application (no. 21370/93) lodged with the Commission by Mr Gustafsson on 2 September 1992;           Whereas the applicant complained of a refusal by the Supreme Insurance Court to hold a public hearing and of the length of the proceedings, to which he was a party, and alleged a breach of Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1), under which "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... public hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...";           Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B, stated that he sought a decision by the Court because the Supreme Insurance Court, the first and only judicial instance in the contested proceedings, had - in breach of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) - examined his case without his having been able to present his arguments orally at a public hearing and because the length of the proceedings in issue had been excessive, as a result of which certain unemployment benefits had not been paid out to him;           Having regard to Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) and Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,   1.       Finds that           (a)   the case raises no serious question affecting the              interpretation or application of the Convention, as the              Court has already established case-law on the right to a              "public hearing" and on the "reasonable time" requirement              in Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1); and           (b)   the case does not, for any other reason, warrant              consideration by the Court as, in the event of a finding              that there has been a breach of the Convention, the              Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe can award              the applicant just satisfaction, having regard to any              proposals made by the Commission;   2.       Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be         considered by the Court.           Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on 11 April 1997 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.   Signed: Carlo RUSSO         Chairman   Signed: Herbert PETZOLD         Registrar