Haslhofer v. Austria



In the case of Haslhofer v. Austria (1),

The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,

constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),

_______________

Notes by the Registrar

1 The case is numbered 126/1996/745/944. The first number is the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the

relevant year (second number). The last two numbers indicate the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its

creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications

to the Commission.

2 Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply

to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9).

________________

Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 2 December 1996, and composed

of the following judges:

Mr C. Russo, Chairman,

Mr F. Matscher,

Mr A. Spielmann,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

Having regard to the application against the Republic of Austria

lodged with the Court on 18 September 1996 by an Austrian national,

Mr Helmut Haslhofer, within the three-month period laid down by

Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 of the Convention (art. 32-1,

art. 47);

Whereas Austria has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the

Court (Article 46 of the Convention (art. 46)) and ratified

Protocol No. 9 to the Convention (P9), Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends

Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) so as to enable a person,

non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a

complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights

("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;

Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court

by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission

under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) of the Convention (art. 48-1-a,

art. 48-1-d);

Having regard to the Commission's report of 15 May 1996 on the

application (no. 21611/93) lodged with the Commission by Mr Haslhofer

on 18 December 1992;

Whereas the applicant complained of the length of

criminal proceedings which had been brought against him before the

Austrian courts, and alleged a breach of Article 6 para. 1 of the

Convention (art. 6-1), under which "In the determination of ... any

criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a ... hearing

within a reasonable time by [a] ... tribunal ...";

Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his

application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B,

stated that he sought a decision by the Court because of, among other

things, the scale of the damage he had allegedly sustained on account

of the length of the proceedings in issue;

Having regard to Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) and

Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,

1 Finds that

(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the interpretation

or application of the Convention, as the Court has already

established case-law on the "reasonable time" requirement in

Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1); and

(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant consideration

by the Court as, in the event of a finding that there has been

a breach of the Convention, the Committee of Ministers of the

Council of Europe can award the applicant just satisfaction,

having regard to any proposals made by the Commission;

2 Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be

considered by the Court.

Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on

15 January 1997 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: Carlo RUSSO

Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

Registrar