CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 avril 2019

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 3 April 2019   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 50848/18 Johann GIGERL against Austria lodged on 25 October 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns civil proceedings relating to an action of trespass which the applicant had brought against his neighbour. He claims that his right to a fair trial under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention has been violated as he had not had sufficient time and opportunity to respond to the submissions of the defendant, and the District Court had not respected its obligation of judicial guidance ( Manuduktionspflicht ). He furthermore complains that the legal remedies available to him were limited due to the low amount in dispute. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the applicant have a fair hearing in the determination of his civil rights and obligations within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular: Has the applicant been able to submit his arguments and contest the opposing party’s submissions and were his arguments duly considered by the national courts? 2.     Did he receive adequate judicial guidance considering the fact that he was not represented by a lawyer during the first instance proceedings? 3.     Did the applicant have sufficient opportunity to have the alleged procedural defects from the first instance proceedings reviewed?