CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 4 juin 2009

.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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt }   443 04.06.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar   Chamber judgments concerning Austria and Greece   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following five Chamber judgments, none of which is final [1] .   Two length-of-proceedings cases, with the Court’s main finding indicated, can be found at the end of the press release.     Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) No violation of Article 3 Parousis v. Greece (application no. 34769/06) The applicant, Apostolos Parousis, is a Greek national who was born in 1954. He was convicted of drug trafficking in 2005 and is currently imprisoned in Trikala Prison (Greece). Relying in particular on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) and Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights, he complained of the excessive length of the proceedings against him – still pending before the Court of Cassation – and about the conditions of his detention, which he claimed were detrimental to his health. Noting that the proceedings in question had already lasted more than five years for three levels of jurisdiction and that nothing in the material submitted to it justified the period of more than three years and four months during which the case had remained at the appeal stage, the European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article   6   §   1. However, the Court considered that the way in which the Greek authorities had handled the applicant’s health problems had not subjected him to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention. Accordingly, it held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article   3. The Court also held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained by Mr Parousis and awarded him 500   euros   (EUR) for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in French.)   Violation of Article 6 § 1 (fairness) Pistolis and Others v. Greece (no. 54594/07) The applicants are eight Greek nationals, members of the same family, who live in Larissa (Greece): Georgios Pistolis, Foteini Antara-Pistoli, Konstantinos Pistolis, Eleni Pistoli, Theologos Pistolis, Antonios Pistolis, Panagiota Zacharopoulou-Pistoli and Paraskevi Antara. They are the relatives of Elias Pistolis, who died at the age of three in 1999 when he was knocked down by a motorcyclist as he was crossing the road with his father. The applicants sued the motorcyclist, a minor driving without a licence, for damages. At the end of the proceedings the Greek courts found that Elias’s father was 30% liable for the accident as he had not shown the requisite diligence. Relying on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair hearing), the applicants complained that the proceedings had been unfair, particularly the decision of the Court of Cassation dismissing their appeal for lack of precision. The Court considered that the restriction imposed by the Court of Cassation on the right of access to a court had not been proportionate to the aim of safeguarding legal certainty and securing the proper administration of justice. Accordingly, it held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article   6   §   1 and awarded the applicants EUR   15,000   jointly for non-pecuniary damage and 3,000   EUR for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in French.)   Violation of Article 3 (treatment) Siasios and Others v. Greece (no. 30303/07) The applicants, Nikolaos Siasios, Georgios Kostoulas, Panayotis Kanelas, Ioannis Chatziefstathiou and Evaggelos Kalamaras, are Greek nationals who were born in 1979, 1960, 1962, 1964 and 1962 respectively. They were arrested in 2006 for drugs-related offences and detained at the police station in Kateríni (northern Greece) a number of times between 2006 and 2007 for periods ranging from two months and 14 days (shortest period) to three months and 20 days (longest period). They were subsequently transferred to Salonika Prison (Greece). Relying on Article   3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), the applicants complained about the conditions of their pre-trial detention. Referring, among other things, to reports produced by the Council of Europe’s European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT), the Court considered that the detention centre of Kateríni Police Station was not an appropriate place for detention of the length imposed on the applicants. With no outdoor yard for walks or physical exercise, no indoor eating facilities, and no radio or television providing contact with the outside world, the detention centre, although it provided acceptable conditions for short-term detention, was not adapted to the requirements of extended detention. Accordingly, the Court held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article   3 and awarded each of the applicants EUR   5,000 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR   300   for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in French.)     Length-of-proceedings cases   In the following cases, the applicants complained in particular of the excessive length of (non-criminal) proceedings.   Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) Strobel v. Austria (no. 25929/05)   Violation of Article 6 § 1 (length) Violation of Article 13 Kyriazis v. Greece (no. 35806/07)     ***   These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts of the Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Press contacts Stefano Piedimonte (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Paramy Chanthalangsy (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 28 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Céline Menu-Lange (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77)   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. [1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17 ‑ member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.