to simplify the procedure and to extend the scope of the remedy to include injunctions to expedite proceedings; recalling further that more than 500 applications exclusively concerning the issue of delay

The Constitutional Court ordered the District Court to proceed with the case without further delay. It awarded the applicant 40,000 Slovakian korunas (SKK) in just satisfaction.

    ALLEGED DELAY IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE JUDGMENT OF 13 AUGUST 2003 By a number of letters, the most recent of which dated 25 January 2012, the applicant informed the Court that the judgment

Romania - 19215/04 Judgment 15.3.2007 [Section III] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Fair hearing Reasonable time Substantial delays (totalling almost three years) caused by a court error concerning

However, in 1981 the Director of Public Prosecutions decided not to pursue the charges, inter alia , on account of the delay in bringing the case to trial, the unlikelihood of a custodial sentence and

The Government argue that the delay complained cannot be attributable to the judicial authorities.

The six-month review was conducted with a 16 day delay. 28/08/2020 03/07/2020 2,500     16011/20 23/03/2020 Norbert László HEVÉR 24/04/1982 Kiss Dominika Szilvia Budapest Art. 5 (4) - excessive

At a later stage of the investigation the courts additionally pointed to the complexity of the case and stressed that the investigation had been carried out without undue delays.

He further argues that the tenant’s good economic conditions did not justify the delay in the enforcement of the order for possession.

Moreover, the Court reiterates that only delays for which the State can be held responsible may justify a finding that a “reasonable time” has been exceeded (see Papachelas v.

He maintained that, despite the Constitutional Court's above finding of 27   November 2001, there were recurring unjustified delays in his proceedings.

The applicant requested the performance of construction works and the payment of penalty, namely 500 Croatian kunas for each day of delay.

  Regard being had to the very lengthy delay while the initial inquiry was being conducted, the negligence in identification of those presumed responsible and the length of both the first inquiry

8 April 2024   THIRD SECTION Application no. 18440/23 OÜ PAREM KALLAS against Estonia lodged on 28 April 2023 communicated on 20 March 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a delay

The applicant’s complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the delay in the restitution of assets seized in the context of a criminal investigation were communicated to the

    The Court observes that the case was not complex and that it does not appear that the applicant caused any delays in the proceedings.

However, the applicant has not been awarded any compensation for the delay in question. It would appear that the case is still pending at first instance.

They further submitted that the judgement had been enforced on 16 April 2019 and any delay in the enforcement did not infringe the core of the applicant’s right of access to court.

In particular, were there on the part of the applicants “excessive or unexplained delays” in submitting their complaints to the Court after the abduction of their relative, have there been considerable

    As to the applicant’s conduct, the Court observes that she did not cause any delays. 28.