CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 8 mars 1994

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                        EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS                                FIRST CHAMBER                          Application No. 14249/88                                 L. and T.P.                                   against                                   Austria                          REPORT OF THE COMMISSION                          (adopted on 8 March 1994)                              TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                    Page   INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1   PART I:   STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2   PART II: SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3                                INTRODUCTION   1.     This Report relates to the application introduced under Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by L. and T.P. against Austria on 4 June 1987.   It was registered on 27 September 1988 under file No. 14249/88.         The applicants were represented by Mr. R. Wandl, a lawyer practising in Sankt Pölten.         The Government of Austria were represented by their Agent, Mr. F. Cede, Ambassador, Head of the International Law Department at the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs.   2.     On 1 September 1993 the Commission (First Chamber) declared admissible the applicants' complaint under Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention relating to the length of the proceedings and declared inadmissible the remainder of the application.   It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:         "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to       it:         a.    it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake            together with the representatives of the parties an            examination of the petition and, if need be, an            investigation, for the effective conduct of which the            States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,            after an exchange of views with the Commission;         b.    it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of            the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly            settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human            Rights as defined in this Convention."   3.     The Commission (First Chamber) found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 8 March 1994 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.         The following members were present when the Report was adopted:              MM.    A. WEITZEL, President                  C.L. ROZAKIS                  F. ERMACORA                  E. BUSUTTIL                  A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK            Mrs.   J. LIDDY            MM.    M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                  B. MARXER                  G.B. REFFI                  B. CONFORTI                  N. BRATZA                  I. BÉKÉS                  E. KONSTANTINOV                                   PART I                           STATEMENT OF THE FACTS   4.     The applicant couple are Austrian nationals residing at Dietersdorf, Lower Austria.   5.     On 13 December 1973 the Lower Austrian Agricultural District Authority (Agrarbezirksbehörde) issued a consolidation plan for Dietersdorf which included the applicant's land.   Upon an appeal by another party this plan was amended by the Regional Land Reform Board (Landesagrarsenat) on 25 January 1977.   On 5 april 1978 the Supreme Land Reform Board (Oberster Agrarsenat) dismissed an appeal lodged by the applicants.   On 3 October 1984 the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof), which had been seized by the applicants, declared certain provisions of the Lower Austrian Agricultural Land Planning Act as unconstitutional and on 27 February 1985 quashed the decision of the Supreme Land Reform Board.   On 5 March 1986 the Supreme Land Reform Board on the basis of amended legislation again dismissed the applicants' appeal.   On 27 November 1986 the Constitutional Court refused to entertain a complaint lodged by the applicants and referred the case to the Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof).   The latter dismissed the applicants' complaint on 3 December 1987.   6.     The admissible complaint concerns the length of the land consolidation proceedings (Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention).                                   PART II                              SOLUTION REACHED   7.     Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   8.     In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary of the Commission, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   9.     In the light of the response of parties, the Commission decided to invite the parties to a meeting in Vienna on 14 February 1994 with a view to discussing the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement. At the meeting, the Commission was represented by Mr. Ermarcora as Delegate, the Secretary to the Commission and other members of the Secretariat. As a result of the negotiations, the parties reached agreement in the terms set out below. This agreement was confirmed by the parties by letters of 3 and 7 March 1994 respectively.   10.    <Translation>         "Statements of the parties with a view to a friendly settlement         With reference to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the parties in the proceedings concerning Application No. 14249/88, lodged by the applicants L. and T.P., declare with a view to a friendly settlement, reached with assistance of the European Commission of Human Rights, as follows:         1.    The Government of the Republic of Austria will pay to the       applicants a sum of AS 25,000 as compensation in respect of any       possible claims relating to the present application, as well as       AS 25,000 in respect of costs incurred in the proceedings before       the Commission.         2.    The applicants declare their application settled.         3.    The applicants waive any further claims against the       Republic of Austria relating to the length of the domestic       proceedings, which was the issue of the application."   <German>         "Erklärungen der Parteien zur gütlichen Regelung         In der Individualbeschwerde Nr. 14249/88 der Beschwerdeführer L. und T.P. verständigen sich die Parteien unter Bezugnahme auf Artikel 28 Abs. 1 b) der Europäischen Konvention zum Schutze der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten und unter Mitwirkung der Europäischen Kommission für Menschenrechte auf die nachstehende gütliche Regelung:         1.    Die Regierung der Republik Österreich zahlt den       Beschwerdeführen als Ausgleich für sämtliche etwaige Ansprüche       im Zusammenhang mit der vorliegenden Individualbeschwerde einen       Betrag von öS 25.000 sowie ihre durch das Beschwerdeverfahren       entstandenen Kosten in Höhe von öS 25.000.         2.    Die Beschwerdeführer erklären ihre oben genannte Beschwerde       als erledigt.         4.    Die Beschwerdeführer verzichten auf die Geltendmachung       allfälliger weiterer Forderungen gegen Österreich im Zusammenhang       mit der Dauer des innerstaatlichen Verfahrens, die Gegenstand der       Beschwerde ist."   11.    At its session on 8 March 1994, the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.         If further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.   12.    For these reasons, the Commission adopted this Report.   Secretary to the First Chamber      President of the First Chamber         (M. F. BUQUICCHIO)                   (A. WEITZEL)