CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 2 avril 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 2 April 2019   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 8326/19 Heiner HOLZAPFEL against Germany lodged on 6 February 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the length of civil proceedings before the social courts. The applicant claimed unemployment benefits before the Konstanz Social Court; after that issue had been resolved, remained the claim that the authorities were not allowed to file his account statements, which contained personal data. The proceedings lasted from September 2011 until 28   February 2017 for two instances. The applicant subsequently claimed compensation for 43 months of undue delay. The Baden-Württemberg Social Court of Appeal acknowledged that there had been undue delay, which it, after deduction of 1 year preparatory time, considered to amount to approximately 2 years, but rejected the applicant’s claim for compensation. Before the Court, the applicant complained that the length of civil proceedings had been incompatible with the reasonable time requirement, laid down in Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The domestic courts had failed to award him adequate compensation. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Can the applicant still claim to be a victim of a violation of the Convention, within the meaning of Article 34?   2.     Was the length of the civil proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?