CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 10 mai 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 152 May 2012 Krakolinig v. Austria (dec.) - 33992/07 Decision 10.5.2012 Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Reasonable time Criminal proceedings lasting over twenty-five years because of the applicant’s state of health: inadmissible   Facts – In 1985 the applicant was indicted for embezzlement. The case was originally scheduled for trial by the regional court in the summer of 1986, but the applicant suffered a heart attack the day before it was due to begin and was unable to attend. Thereafter the case was repeatedly adjourned at the applicant’s request on the basis of expert medical opinion. In March 2007 the applicant requested that the proceedings be terminated because he thought that it would be a violation of the Convention to continue in the circumstances. The domestic courts refused his request and the proceedings are still pending. In separate proceedings the applicant was convicted of other crimes by various district courts in 2000, 2006 and 2009. In his application to the European Court, the applicant complained of the length of the embezzlement proceedings. Law – Article 6 § 1: It was not excluded that the subject-matter of the applicant’s case was of some complexity, as it concerned white-collar crime, but that element alone could not explain the exceptional length of the proceedings in issue. Nor could the Austrian authorities be held exclusively responsible. There was no indication that they had contributed to the delays: the regional court, in particular, had tried repeatedly to hold trial hearings and had had the applicant’s fitness to stand trial examined by medical experts at regular intervals. The repeated postponements and stays were caused by the applicant’s ill-health. While he could not be considered responsible as that was a matter beyond his control, it was without doubt the objective reason for the resulting length of the proceedings. Accordingly, the delays could not be attributed to the domestic courts. The Court observed further that Article   6 did not give a right to have criminal proceedings terminated on account of the accused’s state of health, particularly when, as in the applicant’s case, there was an indication that the person concerned had not been entirely prevented by his state of health from attending court proceedings as such. Conclusion : inadmissible (manifestly ill-founded).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes