CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 24 octobre 2000

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s85016119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s11AD46B1 { font-family:Arial; font-size:7.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sB5225B27 { width:107.74pt; display:inline-block } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s626CA315 { width:160.14pt; display:inline-block } .s2508000D { width:154.23pt; display:inline-block } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .s906CA806 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s5E15F1C8 { width:0.33pt; display:inline-block } .sC5412BEF { width:51.05pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     756   24.10.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING TURKEY AND FRANCE   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following three Chamber judgments [1] .   SECTION 3   (1)     Büker v. Turkey (application no. 29921/96)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Cengiz Büker, a Turkish national, complained about the length (seven years and nine months) of civil proceedings to which he was a party, notably the time taken by his university employer to reinstate him following a decision in his favour by a domestic court. The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to determination of civil rights within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights and awarded the applicant 5,000 French francs (FRF) for non-pecuniary damage. The judgment is available only in English.   (2)     Camps v. France (no. 42401/98)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Gabriel Camps, a French national, complained about the length (more than six years and three months) of administrative proceedings to which he was a party concerning his request for a consolidated loan. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article   6   §   1 and awarded the applicant FRF 30,000 for non-pecuniary damage. Judgment in French.   (3)     Chapus v. France (no. 46693/99)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Patrick Chapus, a French national, complained about the length of industrial tribunal proceedings to which he was a party, which lasted six years and two months. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article   6   §   1 and awarded the applicant FRF   30,000 for non-pecuniary damage and FRF 8,794 for costs and expenses. Judgment in French.     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.