CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 février 2019
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-191599
- Date
- 12 février 2019
- Publication
- 12 février 2019
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleCommunicated
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 12 February 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 73808/17 Javier GARCÍA ESPINAR against Spain lodged on 6 October 2017 SUBJECT MATTER OF the CASE The application concerns the enforcement of a final domestic court’s judgment rendered in the applicant’s favour. The applicant had been unable to take part in a competitive examination (announced in 2009) for admission to the police academy, owing to the age limit. On 21 March 2011 (proceedings no. 626/2009), the Supreme Court declared the age limit on candidates null and void, and recognised the applicant’s right not to be excluded from the 2009 public examination on account of his age. To enforce this judgment, the authorities invited the applicant to take the first test (a physical fitness test) on 7 February 2012. The applicant claims that the invitation was served on him after the scheduled test date had passed. QUESTIONs to the parties Was the judgment of the Supreme Court of 21 March 2011 (proceedings no. 626/2009) enforced within a reasonable time, as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, having regard to the applicant’s claim that the decision informing him of the date for testing his physical fitness was served on him only after the scheduled test date had passed, has there been a breach of the applicant’s right under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 12 février 2019
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-191599
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel