CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 1 février 2005

.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 } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom: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. 72 February 2005 Yavuz and Others v. Turkey (dec.) - 48064/99 Decision 1.2.2005 [Section IV] Article 35 Article 35-1 Six month period Starting-point of the six-month period (application concerning criminal proceedings): preliminary objection allowed   The husband and father of the applicants were found dead after being shot. Criminal proceedings were brought against two individuals. The assize court found one defendant guilty and acquitted the other. The applicants joined the criminal proceedings as a civil party. Those proceedings were finally concluded by a decision of the Court of Cassation, which was added to the case file kept at the registry of the court of assize on 29 April 1998 and was not served on the parties. The applicants applied to the Strasbourg Court on 15 March 1999. Inadmissible pursuant to Article   35 § 1 of the Convention: The applicants relied on Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 13 and on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The Court of Cassation’s judgment had not been served on the parties. The six-month time limit began to run from the date on which the Court of Cassation’s judgment was added to the case file kept at the registry of the court of assize, which was also the date on which the text of the judgment was made available to the parties. It was then for the parties or their representative to show diligence in obtaining a copy.   The applicants had applied to the Strasbourg Court more than six months after the date on which the text of the Court of Cassation’s judgment had been added to the case file kept at the registry of the court of assize. This delay had been due to their own negligence. The application was therefore out of time.   © 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