CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG6
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 14 décembre 2004
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1214DEC005846800
- Date
- 14 décembre 2004
- Publication
- 14 décembre 2004
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s155119B4 { width:28.7pt; display:inline-block } .s9A1B738E { width:7.31pt; display:inline-block } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s9A9EC9C9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:48pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s917C52FD { margin-top:48pt; margin-bottom:48pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .sE24DEA67 { margin-top:48pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s132B84CB { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:justify } .s984A15CA { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s48DB3670 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sFC1B4D41 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s942664A4 { width:16.87pt; display:inline-block } .s296214C8 { width:199.79pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 58468/00 by Alfred KIENDLER against Austria The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14   December 2004 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   B.M. Zupančič , President ,   Mr   L. Caflisch ,   Mr   C. Bîrsan ,   Mr   V. Zagrebelsky ,   Mrs   E. Steiner,   Mrs   A. Gyulumyan,   Mrs   R. Jaeger , judges , and Mr V. Berger , Section Registrar Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 October   1999, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having deliberated, decides as follows:       THE FACTS The applicant, Alfred Kiendler, was an Austrian national who was born in 1920. He was represented before the Court by Mr Hans Werner   Schmidt, a lawyer practising in Graz. The Austrian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ambassador H. Winkler, Head of the International   Law Department at the Federal Ministry of Foreign   Affairs. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was a retired dentist. In 1960, he concluded a contract with the Styria Regional Health Insurance Board ( Gebietskrankenkasse ). In this context, he instituted numerous proceedings in order to contest the contributions he had to pay to the Styria Medical Association ( Ärztekammer ) on the basis of that contract. 1. First set of proceedings On 12   April 1992 the applicant instituted proceedings against the Regional Insurance Board, requesting full reimbursement of the contributions paid to the Styria Medical Association between 1985 and 1991. These proceedings were terminated by final decisions of the Constitutional Court ( Verfassungsgerichtshof ) on 7 June 1999 and 11   October   1999. 2. Second set of proceedings This set of proceedings relates to notifications issued by the Administrative Committee ( Verwaltungsausschuss ) of the Styria Medical Association ordering the applicant to pay his yearly contribution to the pension and invalidity fund ( Vorschreibung der Kammerumlage ). On 14 December 1999 the Administrative Court, in three identical decisions regarding the periods 1989-1993, 1994, and 1995-1996, dismissed as unfounded the applicant's complaint against these orders. These decisions were served on the applicant on 16   February   2000. On 11 October 2004 the applicant's counsel informed the Court that the applicant had died. On 27 October 2004 the applicant's counsel further informed the Court that the applicant's heirs and family members did not wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court. COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the alleged unfairness and length of the two sets of proceedings. Further, relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, he complained about the Austrian authorities' refusal to reimburse his annual contributions. THE LAW The Court takes note of the fact that the applicant died and that no member of his family or heir has expressed a wish to continue the proceedings before the Court in his stead. In these circumstances, the Court concludes that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application and that it should be struck out of its list of cases under Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The Court finds no reasons of a general character, as defined in Article 37 § 1 in fine that would require to continue the proceedings by the virtue of that provision. Consequently, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be discontinued. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Vincent B erger   Boštjan M. Zupančič   Registrar   President  Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
- Formation
- 6
- Date
- 14 décembre 2004
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2004:1214DEC005846800
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral