CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 3 juillet 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 110 July 2008 Vidas v. Croatia   - 40383/04 Judgment 3.7.2008 [Section I] Article 13 Effective remedy Effectiveness of length-of-proceedings remedy lasting over three years: violation   Facts : In 1995 the applicant brought an action for compensation for damage caused by a work-related injury. In March 2002, when his case was for the second time pending before the first-instance court, he lodged a constitutional complaint complaining of the excessive length of the proceedings. In April 2005 the Constitutional Court upheld the applicant’s complaint, finding a violation of his right to a hearing within a reasonable time and awarding him EUR 700 in compensation. The proceedings ended in February 2007, when the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal on points of law. Law : Article 6   §   1 – Owing to the low amount of compensation awarded, the applicant could still claim to be a victim of the violation alleged. As the proceedings had lasted a total of nine years and three months before three levels of jurisdiction, the Court found that they had not been concluded within a reasonable time. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 13 – The applicant had availed himself of the effective remedy for the length of proceedings by lodging a complaint with the Constitutional Court. However, the proceedings upon his complaint had lasted three years and fifteen days. The Court considered that a remedy designed to address the length of proceedings could be considered effective only if it provided adequate redress speedily, which in the present situation had not been the case. The effectiveness of the constitutional complaint as a length-of-proceedings remedy had therefore been undermined by its excessive duration. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 – EUR 2,300 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.   © 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