The Government considered that the criminal case was complex and the delays were mainly caused by the conduct of the applicant and her representative.

On 1 March 2001 the Constitutional Court found that the District Office had violated the applicant’s right to a hearing without unjustified delay.

Besides, the at they received was bigger than awarded, and this excess had compensated them for any possible delays. 13.

pour une durée maximale de trente jours ; En l'absence de représentant de la PREFECTURE D'ILLE ET VILAINE, dûment convoqué, En l'absence du procureur général régulièrement avisé, Monsieur Yves DELPERIE

pour une durée maximale de trente jours ; En l'absence de représentant de la PREFECTURE D'ILLE ET VILAINE, dûment convoqué, En l'absence du procureur général régulièrement avisé, Monsieur Yves DELPERIE

Mr Eastaway does not now suggest that the delay has been such that a fair trial is impossible.

The filing of a complaint about delays shall not be limited by time. 3.

    Alleged unreasonable delay: Article 6 § 1 of the Convention The applicants complain that the delay during the relevant period violated the reasonable time requirement of Article 6 § 1 of

In his decision of 30   October   2000, the Deputy Chancellor of Justice found that no unnecessary delay had taken place.

Delays imputable to the District Court totalled 74 months. 11.

    The applicant also complains that the Code of Fiscal Offences does not provide for any effective remedy to challenge unreasonable delays in the proceedings.

The Ministry concluded, however, that the acknowledgment of the delays represented sufficient satisfaction for non-pecuniary damage.

    The Regional Court found that there had been undue delays of some eleven months in the investigation proceedings prior to the applicant’s arrest.

The adjournments caused a delay of nine months and six days (see Appendix). 14.

The Regional Court was responsible for this delay as it failed to exercise the requisite control and to urge the expert to complete his opinion.

These adjournments caused a delay of almost two years.

    The alleged delay in access to courses 30.

  On 6 January 1993 a District Judge acceded to the Council’s submissions that the applicant had been guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay, causing prejudice to the Council, and he accordingly

an amended section 57 of the Tax Offences Act entered into force that added a new paragraph 6 stating that proceedings regarding tax offences had to be conducted speedily and without any unnecessary delays