CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 30 mai 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sE509157B { width:2.8pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s13F94BDE { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s33141CA1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sB4D5CB4E { width:4.94pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s3133A7C8 { font-family:Arial; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     289   30.5.2002   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENT CONCERNING Austria   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following Chamber judgment which is not final. [1]   Section 3   (1)     W.F. v. Austria (application no. 38275/97)   Violation Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 On 21 May 1995 W.F., an Austrian national, was involved in a road traffic accident. He complained that he was punished twice for the same offence. On 19 October 1995 Braunau District Administrative Authority ( Bezirkshauptmannschaft ) found that he had been driving under the influence of alcohol and fined him 14,000.00 Austrian schillings (ATS). And, on 1 August 1996, Mattighofen District Court convicted him of n egligently causing bodily harm in particularly dangerous conditions ( fahrlässige Körperverletzung unter besonders gefährlichen Verhältnissen ), and fined him ATS   8,000. His appeal against this conviction was unsuccessful.   The European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right not to be tried or punished twice) and that the finding constituted sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage caused. It awarded the applicant 4,151.48 euros for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in English.)   ***   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 ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [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.