CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 1 août 2000

.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 } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 21 August 2000 Entleitner v. Austria - 29544/95 Judgment 1.8.2000 [Section III] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Public hearing Oral hearing Lack of oral hearing before Administrative Court: violation Facts : The applicant appealed to the Regional Land Reform Board against an administrative decision concerning ownership of certain land rights. His appeal was rejected after an oral hearing. The Constitutional Court declined to deal with his constitutional complaint and referred the case to the Administrative Court, which dismissed the applicant’s claim and also his request for an oral hearing. Law : Article 6 § 1 (independence and impartiality) – The Court has already held in previous cases that the regional land reform boards are independent and impartial, and the legal situation concerning their membership and procedure has not changed. Conclusion : no violation (unanimous). Article 6 § 1 (lack of oral hearing) – The Court has already found that the lack of an oral hearing before the Administrative Court constitutes a violation and there are no circumstances to distinguish this case from previous ones. Conclusion : violation (unanimous). Article 41 – The Court cannot speculate on the outcome of the proceedings had an oral hearing been held and the applicant’s claim for pecuniary damage must be dismissed. The Court made an award in respect of costs and expenses.   © 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