CEDH · PRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG — 9 mars 2005

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .s5D8BCAF7 { width:3.12pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS 117 9.3.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   Polish length-of-proceedings cases inadmissible   The European Court of Human Rights has declared inadmissible two Polish test cases concerning the length of legal proceedings, because the applicants had not made applications under a new act which could have provided them with an effective remedy.   Hundreds of other applicants to the Court in the same situation have one more week (until March 17 2005) to apply to the Polish courts under the new law, introduced on 17 September 2004 (the 2004 Act).   The applicants in the two inadmissible cases – Charzyński v. Poland (application no. 15212/03) and Tadeusz Michalak v. Poland (no. 24549/03) – complain that they were denied a hearing within a reasonable time, in breach of Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that they had no effective remedy, relying on Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention.   The Court found the cases inadmissible as the applicants failed to exhaust domestic remedies, in that they had not made an application under the 2004 Act. The Court will now resume its examination of similar cases.   The 2004 Act allows those involved in court proceedings to file a complaint concerning the length of their proceedings while those proceedings are still pending. The appellate court can find a violation of Article 6 of the Convention and instruct the lower court to take measures to accelerate the proceedings. The appellate court can also award the complainant compensation of up to 10,000 zlotys (approximately 2,550 euros).   The new remedy is also available to individuals who lodged applications with the European Court of Human Rights while their domestic proceedings were still pending even if the proceedings have subsequently been terminated, provided their applications have not yet been declared admissible by the Court.   The 2004 Act was introduced in response to the European Court’s Grand Chamber judgment in the case Kudła v. Poland (application no.   30210/96) (no. 765 of 26 October 2000), in which the Court held that the lack of an effective remedy for a breach of the right to a hearing within a reasonable time was in violation of Article 13.   Persons whose proceedings in Poland have finished can bring an action for damages against the State. Two further test cases before the European Court concerning this question have yet to be determined. A decision is expected in the next few weeks.     ***   Further information about the Court can be found on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Press contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. Since 1 November 1998 it has sat as a full-time Court composed of an equal number of judges to that of the States party to the Convention. The Court examines the admissibility and merits of applications submitted to it. It sits in Chambers of 7 judges or, in exceptional cases, as a Grand Chamber of 17 judges. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe supervises the execution of the Court’s judgments.