CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 9 octobre 2014

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 178 October 2014 Xynos v. Greece - 30226/09 Judgment 9.10.2014 [Section I] Article 35 Article 35-1 Exhaustion of domestic remedies New remedy to be exhausted in cases concerning length of proceedings before the administrative courts: inadmissible Facts – The applicant complained before the Court about the length of administrative proceedings. The Government raised an objection of non-exhaustion as Law no.   4239/2014, which entered into force on 20   February 2014, had created a remedy allowing compensation to be obtained for unjustified delays in proceedings before civil or criminal courts and the Court of Audit. Law – Article 35 § 1: The remedy afforded by Law no.   4239/2014 offered the requisite effectiveness, since it provided for redress a   posteriori for an existing breach of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time in respect of the relevant court proceedings. (a)     Proceedings concerning request for re-adjustment of the amount of the retirement pension : The period to be taken into consideration ended on 18   April 2008, with judgment no.   966/2008 of the Court of Audit, that is to say more than six months before the applicant lodged his application on 15   May 2009. Conclusion : inadmissible (out of time). (b)     Proceedings concerning claim for damages : These proceedings had begun with the applicant’s claim to the Court of Audit on 9   November 2009 – that is before the entry into force of Law no.   4239/2014 – and were still pending. It was in principle at the time when the application was lodged that the effectiveness of a given remedy had to be assessed. However, given the nature of Law no.   4239/2014 and the context in which it had been enacted, it was justified in the circumstances to make an exception to the general principle. The applicants’ heirs were thus required, in accordance with Article   35 §   1 of the Convention, to use this remedy, after the proceedings before the Court of Audit ended. Moreover, there was no exceptional circumstance that could dispense the applicant’s heirs from the obligation to avail themselves, in due course, of this domestic remedy. Conclusion : inadmissible (failure to exhaust domestic remedies). The Court further found, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article   6 §   1 on account of the belated execution of judgment no.   966/2008 of the Court of Audit. (See also Techniki Olympiaki A.E. v.   Greece (dec.), 40547/10, 1   October 2013, Information Note   167 )   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes