CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;SCREENINGPANEL;ENG — 24 avril 1996

.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 Schottenberger v. Austria (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 15/1996/634/818.   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 29 March and 23 April 1996, and composed of the following judges:         Mr L.-E. Pettiti, Chairman,       Mr F. Matscher,       Mr B. Walsh,   and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,         Having regard to the application against the Republic of Austria lodged with the Court on 13 February 1996 by an Austrian national, Mr Karl Schottenberger, within the three-month period laid down by Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 (art. 32-1, art. 47) of the Convention;         Whereas Austria has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court (Article 46 of the Convention) (art. 46) and ratified Protocol No. 9 (P9) to the Convention, Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention 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) (art. 48-1-a, art. 48-1-d) of the Convention;         Having regard to the Commission's report of 18 October 1995 on the application (no. 20223/92) lodged with the Commission by Mr Schottenberger on 29 April 1992;         Whereas the applicant complained of the length of proceedings before Austrian administrative authorities and the Austrian Administrative Court, to which he was a party, and alleged a breach of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of the Convention, under which "In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a ... 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 on account of, inter alia, (i) the alleged lack of established case-law concerning the applicability of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) to a social security dispute relating to both the payment of contributions and entitlement to social benefits, and (ii) the considerable pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage allegedly caused by the length of the proceedings in issue;         Having regard to Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention 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 "civil"            nature, for the purposes of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) of            the Convention, of the right to a retirement pension, the            main subject-matter of the case in question, and the            "reasonable time" requirement in Article 6 para. 1            (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 24 April 1996 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.   Signed: Louis-Edmond PETTITI       Chairman   Signed: Herbert PETZOLD       Registrar