CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 30 octobre 1998

.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 } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .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. October 1998 Styranowski v. Poland - 28616/95 Judgment 30.10.1998 Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of compensation proceedings: violation   [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions ). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-law Information Note summaries.] I.   ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Period to be taken into consideration Starting-point: when Poland recognised right of individual petition. End: when appeal dismissed. Total: two years, eight months and sixteen days. B.   Applicable criteria Complexity of case: some procedural complexity on account of need to transfer case between different courts but neither this nor nature of substantive issues raised by applicant’s claim can justify length of proceedings. Conduct of applicant: common ground that he did not contribute to length of proceedings. Conduct of national authorities: two periods of inactivity lasting together over fifteen months – as no explanation provided for these periods delays have to be attributed to national authorities. What was at stake: compensation proceedings based on reduction of applicant’s pension – in view of his age proceedings of undeniable importance for applicant – expeditious decision called for. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION No award under the head of pecuniary damage and claim allowed in part under head of non-pecuniary damage. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sum to applicant for non-pecuniary damage (unanimously).   © 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