CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 21 septembre 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 22 September 2000 Wojnowicz v. Poland - 33082/96 Judgment 21.9.2000 [Section IV] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of civil proceedings: violation Facts : The application concerns the length of civil proceedings which began in 1987. In 1995 an appellate court divided the proceedings into two separate sets, both of which are still pending. Law : Article 6 § 1 – The Court is not competent to examine the period prior to 1 May 1993, when Poland’s recognition of the right of petition took effect, but it may take into account the stage reached in the proceedings at that date. In that respect, the Ministry of Justice had acknowledged as early as 1989 that the length had exceeded a reasonable time. The period to be examined is 7 years 4 months. The case was not of such complexity as to justify this length and the applicant bears no responsibility for the length. There were, however, periods of inactivity attributable to the judicial authorities, for which no convincing explanation has been given. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 – The Court dismissed the applicant’s claim in respect of pecuniary damage as speculative. It awarded him PLN 25,000 in respect of costs.   © 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