CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 7 mars 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 25 March 2024   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 51641/22 WILLIAM HINTON & SONS, LDA. against Portugal lodged on 26 October 2022 communicated on 7 March 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant company is a limited liability company registered in Funchal (Madeira). The application concerns the length of civil proceedings instituted by the applicant company with the Administrative Court of Lisbon. On 26 March 1990 the applicant company appealed to the Administrative Court of Lisbon against a decision of the municipality of Funchal revoking a construction licence that had been issued in its favour. The final decision on the case was taken by the Supreme Administrative Court on 10 May 2005. On 14 March 2006 the applicant filed a non-contractual civil liability action against the Portuguese State before the Administrative Court of Lisbon, claiming compensation for the excessive length of the proceedings concerning the construction licence. After the claim was dismissed by the Administrative Court of Lisbon, on 23   May 2019, the Central Administrative Court of the South granted 5,000   euros (EUR) to the applicant for non-pecuniary damages sustained due to the excessive length of the proceedings before the administrative courts concerning the construction license. On 30 June 2022 the Supreme Administrative Court rejected the appeal for judicial review lodged by the applicant company against the judgment of the Central Administrative Court of the South. Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant company complains of a breach of its right to a judicial decision made in a reasonable time. In particular, it claims that the compensation already awarded by national courts for the excessive length of the proceedings at issue is too low in view of the circumstances of the case. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Can the applicant still claim to be a “victim” of a violation of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 34? In particular, was the compensation awarded on 23 May 2019 by the Central Administrative Court of the South adequate to the non-pecuniary damages suffered by the applicant company, in view of the length of the main proceedings and also the overall length of the liability proceedings before the administrative courts (see, Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, § 93, ECHR 2006-V; Scordino v.   Italy (no. 1) [GC], no. 36813/97, §§ 195 and 206, ECHR 2006-V; and Domingues Loureiro and Others v. Portugal , no. 57290/08, §§ 37-38 and 45, 12   April 2011)?   2.     If so, was the length of the main administrative proceedings in the applicant company’s case in line with the “reasonable time” requirement under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no.   30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; and Domingues Loureiro and Others , cited above, § 58)?