CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 21 septembre 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 } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s85016119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s84C82F45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:7.33pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sE25D4327 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-36pt; font-size:11pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s3B1D034 { width:22.56pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .s31902EF { width:148.56pt; text-indent:0pt; 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 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     625   21.9.2000   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING THE UNITED KINGDOM AND POLAND     The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following chamber judgments [1] :   Section 4   (1)                Howarth v. United Kingdom (application no. 38081/97) Violation Art.6, no violation Art. 3   Jeremy Howarth, a British national born in 1945 and living in Radclive (England) complained under Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights that the two year delay between his original and subsequent sentence was excessive. He also complained under Article 3 (prohibition of degrading treatment) of the Convention. The European Court of Human Rights held by six votes to one that there had been a violation of Article 6 and unanimously that there had been no violation of Article 3. The Court awarded the applicant   750 pounds sterling (GBP) for non-pecuniary damage and GBP 8,000 for costs and expenses.   The judgment is available only in English.     (2)                Wojnowicz v. Poland (no.33082/96)   Violation Article 6 § 1   Krzysztof Wojnowicz, a Polish national born in 1948 and living in Warsaw, complained about the length of the civil proceedings to which he was a party, which lasted seven years and four months. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 and awarded the applicant 25,000 Polish zlotys (PLN) for non-pecuniary damage and PLN 2,562 for costs and expenses. (Judgment in English.) *** 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.