CEDH · PRESS;HEARINGS;ENG — 9 novembre 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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s69BE285C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:85.05pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-85.05pt } .s9A223E1B { width:11.03pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s595A57E4 { width:85.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s3CED24E9 { width:27.05pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s9F8EB0C0 { width:18.63pt; display:inline-block } .s9E97F54A { width:85.05pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   604 9.11.2005   Press release issued by the Registrar   GRAND CHAMBER HEARING SURMELI v. GERMANY   The European Court of Human Rights is holding a Grand Chamber hearing today Wednesday 9 November 2005 at 9 a.m., in the case of Surmeli v. Germany (application no. 75529/01).   The applicant   The case concerns an application brought by Mustafa-Selim Sürmeli, a 43-year-old Turkish national who lives in Stade (Germany). Since 1 July 1994 he has been in receipt of an occupational-disability pension.   Summary of the facts   In May 1982 the applicant broke an arm and his nose following an accident with a cyclist. After negotiations with the cyclist’s insurers had failed, the applicant applied to the German courts on 18 September 1989, in particular seeking damages and payment of a monthly pension.   The proceedings in the civil courts have comprised two phases. The first ended when Hanover Regional Court acknowledged the applicant’s entitlement to claim damages at a rate of 80% for the consequences of the accident. An appeal by the applicant against that decision was unsuccessful and his subsequent appeal on points of law was dismissed in December 1993.   The second phase of the civil proceedings concerns the assessment of the amount of the damages and monthly pension to be awarded to the applicant. It began in March 1994, after the case file had been sent back from the Federal Court of Justice to the Hanover Regional Court, and is still in progress. To that end the court took steps including the appointment of a number of experts and the parties entered into negotiations on an out-of-court settlement, which ultimately failed. During that phase the applicant had, among other things, objected to several of the experts and applied for the regional court judges to withdraw.   On 14 March 2001 the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint about the excessive length of the proceedings. The Federal Constitutional Court requested information on the state of the proceedings from the regional court, which informed it that it had scheduled a hearing for 9   July 2001. On 16 August 2001 the Federal Constitutional Court decided not to examine the applicant’s complaint, without giving reasons for its decision. A second constitutional complaint was dismissed on 27 June 2002 as being insufficiently substantiated.   In May 2002 the applicant applied to the Hanover Regional Court for legal aid in order to bring an action for damages against the Land of Lower Saxony on account of the length of the proceedings in the regional court. His application was refused at first instance and on appeal.   Complaints   Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant complains of the length of the proceedings before Hanover Regional Court, which to date have lasted more than 16 years. He further submits under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) that German law does not afford him a remedy in respect of the length of the proceedings. Lastly, he complains that lodging a constitutional complaint to that effect with the Federal Constitutional Court is not an effective remedy.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 24 November 1999 and declared admissible on 29 April 2004. On 1 February 2005, the Chamber to which the case had been allocated, relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, under Article 30 [1] of the Convention.   Composition of the Court   The case will be heard by the Grand Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (French), President , Christos Rozakis (Greek), Nicolas Bratza (British), Boštjan M. Zupančič (Slovenian), Georg Ress (German), Lucius Caflisch (Swiss) [2] , Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portuguese) Riza Türmen (Turkish), Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Volodymyr Butkevych (Ukrainian), John Hedigan (Irish), Matti Pellonpää (Finnish), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Antonella Mularoni (San Marinese), Alvina Gyulumyan (Armenian), Danute Jočienė (Lithuanian), Ján Šikuta (Slovakian), judges , Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italian), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Ljiljana Mijović (citizen of Bosnia and Herzegovina), substitute judges , and also Lawrence Early , Deputy Grand Chamber Registrar .   Representatives of the parties   Government :   Almut Wittling-Vogel , Agent ,   Bernd Netzer , Christine Steinbeiß-Winkelmann , Thomas Laut , Advisers ;   Applicant :   Olaf Wegner , Counsel ,   Alexandra Bek, Adviser .   The applicant, Mustafa-Selim Sürmeli will also attend the hearing.     After the hearing the Court will begin its deliberations, which are held in private.     ***     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)   Beverley Jacobs (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21) 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. More detailed information about the Court and its activities can be found on its Internet site. [1] Where a case pending before a Chamber raises a serious question affecting the interpretation of the Convention or the protocols thereto, or where the resolution of a question before the Chamber might have a result inconsistent with a judgment previously delivered by the Court, the Chamber may, at any time before it has rendered its judgment, relinquish jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, unless one of the parties to the case objects. [2] Judge elected in respect of Liechtenstein.