CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 24 avril 2001

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s48F8B750 { font-size:8pt; display:none } .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 } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8517BF2E { width:24.76pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s471A04A2 { width:71.5pt; display:inline-block } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .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 } .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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS [Note1]     557   24.7.2001   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING THE NETHERLANDS AND THE UNITED KINGDOM   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following two Chamber judgments (only Van Nus v. the Netherlands is final [1] ):   SECTION 1   (1)     Van Nus v. the Netherlands (application no. 37538/96)   Friendly settlement Dirk Jan van Nus, a Dutch national, complained, relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to determination of civil rights within a reasonable time) of the European Convention on Human Rights, about the length of a set of administrative proceedings, which lasted approximately five years, concerning applications for building modifications to his house.   The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which 6,302.75 Netherlands Guilders inclusive of costs and expenses is to be paid to the applicant on an ex gratia basis. (The judgment is available only in English.)   SECTION 3   (2)     Hirst v. the United Kingdom (no. 40787/98)   Violation Article 5 § 4 John Hirst, a British national, alleged that there had been undue delay between the reviews by the Parole Board of his continued detention as a prisoner serving a sentence of discretionary life imprisonment. He relied on Article 5 § 4 (right to have lawfulness of detention decided speedily by a court).   The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 5 § 4 and awarded the applicant 1,000 pounds sterling (GBP) for non-pecuniary damage and GBP 7,500 for costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only 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. [Note1]   Press release for grouped judgments . To be save in t:\gen\press\Court\eng\Judgments\Grand Chamber or Chamber\ and named by month[s], [day] and language, with case names in brackets if specification necessary (e.g. Jan   13 Eng (Scozzari, Giunta, Rotaru) or Feb   4+11 Eng or Mar Eng).