CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 5 octobre 2006

.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. 90 October 2006 Grässer v. Germany - 66491/01 Judgment 5.10.2006 [Section V] Article 34 Victim Lack of adequate redress for excessive length of proceedings: violation   Facts : In 1974 the applicant brought an official liability action seeking compensation from the city. In 1976 his real estate was sold by compulsory auction. After three retrials, his action in compensation was dismissed. The proceedings terminated with the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court served on the applicant in 2003. In 2004, insolvency proceedings were initiated against the applicant. Upon the applicant’s complaint, the Federal Constitutional Court in 2000 held that his right to an effective judicial remedy under the Basic Law had been violated in that the length of the proceedings had been obviously excessive. In 2001, the applicant brought another official liability action against the Land for compensation of damage suffered as a result of the excessive length of proceedings. These proceedings are still pending. Law : Article   34 – The Federal Constitutional Court had acknowledged in substance a violation of Article   6(1). However, it was not empowered to set deadlines, to order specific measures to speed up the proceedings effectively or to award compensation. The applicant’s official liability action for compensation of damage sustained because of the length of the proceedings was still pending and, in any event, in those proceedings the applicant would not be able to obtain compensation for non-pecuniary damage. Therefore, the German authorities could not be taken to have provided the applicant with adequate redress for the breach of his right to a hearing within a reasonable time and, consequently, the applicant had not lost his status as a “victim” within the meaning of Article   34. Conclusion : Government’s preliminary objection dismissed (unanimously). Article   6(1) – Despite the complexity of the case, the overall length of the proceedings (almost 29   years involving four levels of jurisdiction) disclosed that the civil courts could not be considered to have treated the case with the diligence required, given that the applicant's economic existence was at stake in them. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article   41 – The Court made an award for non-pecuniary damage (EUR 45,000). See also Sürmeli v . Germany ([GC], no.   75529/01, 8   June 2006) in CLR no. 87, at p. 33.   © 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