CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 mars 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 15 April 2024   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 57310/22 Robert AGAJANIANI against Georgia lodged on 9 December 2022 communicated on 26 March 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the length of the criminal proceedings against the applicant. The applicant was convicted in absentia by a trial court on 19 October 2010. On 30 November 2016, following his extradition to Georgia, the applicant lodged an appeal against the trial court’s judgment. The appellate court delivered its judgment on 24   February 2022. The Supreme Court declared the applicant’s appeal on points of law inadmissible on 8   August 2022 (allegedly served on the applicant with delay). The applicant relied on Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the length of the criminal proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (see, among other authorities, Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], no.   25444/94, ECHR 1999-II)? In this connection, which period should be taken into account in order to assess the reasonableness of the said proceedings?