CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 26 octobre 2000

.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 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s1EFF7957 { width:54.52pt; display:inline-block } .s63969D63 { width:154.57pt; display:inline-block } .s151BEA95 { width:39.15pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2DFC58D2 { width:47.86pt; display:inline-block } .s37CDBE05 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; 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     767   26.10.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING LUXEMBOURG, POLAND, PORTUGAL AND ITALY   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following four Chamber judgments. Only G.J. v. Luxembourg is final [1] .   SECTION 2   (1)     G.J. v. Luxembourg (application no. 21156/93)   Violation Article 6 § 1 G.J., a Danish national, complained about the length (six years) of proceedings to which he was a party relating to the liquidation of the limited liability company in which he owned 90% of the shares. The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to a hearing within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights and awarded the applicant 45,000 Danish kroner (DKK) for non-pecuniary damage and DKK 35,000 for costs and expenses. The judgment is available only in English.   (2)     Leoni v. Italy (no. 43269/98)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Pier Paolo Leoni, an Italian national, complained about the fairness of civil proceedings. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (access to a court) and awarded the applicant 10,000,000   Italian lire (ITL) for non-pecuniary damage. Judgment in French.   SECTION 4   (3)     Sobczyk v. Poland (nos. 25693/94 and 27387/95)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Aleksander Sobczyk, a Polish national, complained about civil proceedings, which lasted seven years, four months and are still pending, following his dismissal from a group of industrial enterprises in the coal industry. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 (right to have civil rights determined within a reasonable time) and awarded the applicant 20,000 Polish zlotys (PLN) for non-pecuniary damage and PLN 2,000 for costs and expenses. Judgment in English.     (4)     Castanheira Barros v. Portugal (no. 36945/97)   Violation Article 6 § 1 Jorge Manuel Castanheira Barros, a Portuguese national born in 1952 and living in Coimbra, complained about civil proceedings relating to his pay, which lasted nine years. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicant 900,000   Portuguese escudos (PTE) for non-pecuniary damage and PTE 150,000 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.