CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 26 septembre 2002

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 45 August-September 2002 Karahalios v. Greece (dec.) - 62503/00 Decision 26.9.2002 [Section I] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Access to court Non-enforcement of final judgment: admissible The applicant is a public works contractor who brought proceedings to secure payment of the balance outstanding for works performed under public contract. This was granted by a court ruling which fixed the sums payable by the public authorities. The decision has become final but, despite the steps taken by the applicant, the authorities have not as yet paid the amounts owing. Admissible under Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (objection of non-exhaustion): enforcement proceedings against the State, a remedy introduced by the constitutional reform of April 2001, is a means of recovering amounts owed by the State. However, this possibility did not yet exist at the date when the application came before the Court, and so the applicant cannot be blamed for not availing himself of it before he petitioned the Court. Although this new procedure now enables the applicant to secure the payment of the amounts owed, it cannot remedy the State’s protracted failure to comply with the final court ruling that fixed the said amounts; the objection is therefore dismissed.   © 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