CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 février 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .s8E0918A8 { width:37.55pt; display:inline-block } .s7C2C4941 { width:149.75pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .sE3506DAE { width:5.68%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sA7942D1D { width:13.66%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sC5723941 { width:27.32%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s56479885 { width:12.52%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s356D311C { width:9.12%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCA408D5C { width:22.58%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sF314C99F { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sAB95A5CB { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sBB8C798C { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#424242 } .sEA4BDE0D { width:5.68%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s2C119C0F { width:13.66%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB9026611 { width:27.32%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s43723313 { width:12.52%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4725AB00 { width:9.12%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7A673FBE { width:22.58%; border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sA4BC3E2E { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 34384/24 Imre PALÁGYI and Others against Hungary and 2 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 19   February 2026 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphane Pisani , President ,   Juha Lavapuro,   Hugh Mercer , judges , and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article   37 of the Convention. The Government acknowledged the excessive length of civil proceedings. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the cases. The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declarations. The Court observes that Article   37 §   1   (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if: “... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. Thus, it may strike out applications under Article   37 §   1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v.   Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no.   26307/95, §§   75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI). The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Gazsó v. Hungary, no. 48322/12, 16 July 2015 and Csatári   and   Others v. Hungary [Committee], no. 18514/24, 20 May 2025). Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1   (c)). In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1 in fine ). Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article   37 §   2 of the Convention ( Josipović v.   Serbia (dec.), no.   18369/07, 4   March 2008). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 12 March 2026.     Attila Teplán   Stéphane Pisani   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     34384/24 26/08/2024 (12 applicants) Imre PALÁGYI 1940 József FEHÉR 1951 József GUTTYÁN 1951 János KISS 1952 András KORMOS 1942 Pál KOVÁCS 1970 János LOVÁSZ 1950 Lukács MAJLÁTH 1962 Sándor NÉMETI 1956 Illésné NYESŐ 1934 Mihály Károlyné SZILÁGYI 1961 Emil TÓTH 1977   Pintér Fruzsina Győr 02/12/2025 15/01/2026 200     37247/24 21/11/2024 (23 applicants) Ferenc PÁL 1956 Jánosné BAGI 1944 Istvánné BÖRÖNTE 1964 Lukács BOROS 1959 László FEJES 1972 Csilla GAJDOSNÉ KANÁLOS 1973 Anita KÁTAINÉ MARKÓ 1979 Antal KUCZORA 1950 Györgyné KÜRI 1932 Erzsébet LAJKÓNÉ TÓTH 1971 Anita LÁSZLÓ-MÓRA 1976 Csaba LUKÁCSI 1974 Márta MÉSZÁROSNÉ VAS 1965 Attila MÓRA 1969 Józsefné SIPOS 1954 János SZABÓ 1985 Zoltán SZATMÁRI 1970 Sándor SZÖLLŐSI 1942 Csaba TÁRNAI 1968 Imre TÓTH 1954 József TÓTH 1955 Andrea VAKHAL 1982 Erika VAKHAL 1971 Pintér Fruzsina Győr 01/12/2025 15/01/2026 200     37356/24 03/12/2024 (29 applicants) Fruzsina ZALAVÁRI 1983 Gábor Antal FARKAS 1957 Erzsébet HERCZEGNÉ VLAHOVICS 1960 László HOLECZ 1958 Tibor HORVÁTH 1956 Anasztázia IVÁNKOVICS 1975 Gábor József KARDOS 1954 Anita KISS 1969 Bernadett KISS 1974 József KOLTAI 1954 Csaba KRISTÓ 1978 Balázs LÁSZLÓ 1978 László NAGY 1967 Gábor PETHES 1983 Ildikó Erzsébet PETHESNÉ KOHUT 1957 Ilona SEBŐKNÉ NÉMETH 1945 István SZABÓ 1971 Tímea SZEITLNÉ SZENCZ 1974 Imre SZIPOLA 1950 István Jánosné SZÖRCSÖK 1947 Istvánné TAPODI 1954   Edit Ilona TÓTH 1954 Katalin TÓTH-NÉMETH 1964 Béla TÜSKE 1944 Erzsébet VALENTIN 1956 Krisztián VALTER 1976 Rózsa VARGA 1961 Tiborné VARGA 1957 Zoltán VARGA 1959   Incze Gergely Budapest 02/12/2025 15/01/2026 200   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant