T.H. v. Austria



AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

Application No. 21213/93

by T. H.

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 17 January 1996, the following members being present:

Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. E. BUSUTTIL

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

K. HERNDL

Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 27 August 1992 by

T. H. against Austria and registered under file No. 21213/93;

Having regard to:

- the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of

the Commission;

- the Commissions's partial decision of 18 October 1994;

- the observations submitted by the respondent Government on

1 February 1995, and the observations in reply submitted by the

applicant on 2 May 1995;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is an Austrian citizen. She is represented before

the Commission by Mr. Erich Proksch, a lawyer practising in Vienna.

The applicant was convicted in administrative criminal

proceedings of contraventions of the legislation on rest times for

drivers. Penal orders were issued on 4 January 1991, 7 January 1991

and 8 January 1991 by the Baden District Authority by which the

applicant was fined totals of AS 38,500.00 (penal orders of 4 January),

AS 15,500.00 (7 January) and AS 2,500 (8 January). Periods of

detention in default of 42 days (4 January), 16 days (7 January) and

72 hours (8 January) were ordered.

The applicant's appeal to the Lower Austrian Regional Government

was rejected on 18 March 1991, although one of the fines was reduced.

On 11 June 1991 the Constitutional Court rejected the applicant's

constitutional complaint, and on 20 July 1992 the Administrative Court

dismissed the applicant's administrative complaint.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant alleges a violation of Article 6 of the Convention

in that her conviction in administrative criminal proceedings was not

accompanied by the requisite procedural guarantees, in particular that

the Administrative Court was not a "tribunal" within the meaning of

Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The Commission took a partial decision in the case on

18 October 1994.

The Government's observations were submitted on 1 February 1995

and the applicant's observations in reply on 2 May 1995.

THE LAW

The applicant alleges a violation of Article 6 (Art. 6) of the

Convention. The Government consider that the case does not disclose

a violation of Article 6 (Art. 6).

The Commission has had regard to the facts of the present case,

to the parties' observations, and to the case-law of the European Court

of Human Rights. It finds that the case raises questions under the

Convention which cannot at this stage be rejected as being manifestly

ill-founded, and which require to be determined on the merits. No

other ground of inadmissibility has been established.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

DECLARES THE REMAINDER OF THE APPLICATION ADMISSIBLE, without

prejudging the merits of the case.

Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber

(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (C.L. ROZAKIS)