CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 12 octobre 1992

.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 } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .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 No. October 1992 Boddaert v. Belgium - 12919/87 Judgment 12.10.1992 Article 6 Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of criminal proceedings: no violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] A.   Period to be taken into consideration Starting-point: issue of warrant for the applicant's arrest. End: delivery of the Court of Cassation's judgment. Total: six years, two months and twenty-two days, after deduction of the period during which the applicant had fled to Spain. B.   Applicable criteria Reasonableness of the length of proceedings: to be determined in the light of the circumstances of the case, which in this instance called for an overall assessment. Inquiry was a difficult one - the two suspects accused each other of having committed the crime. Criminal conduct of applicant's co-accused, who was moreover suspected of having committed another murder - shelving of first file pending outcome of investigation of the second case - subsequent joinder of the two cases. Gravity of the offences and interdependence of the charges could reasonably appear to make it necessary for such a "parallel progression" of the cases. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously).   © 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