Resolution ResDH(2004)77
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 21 December 1999
in the case of G.S. against Austria
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 December 2004
at the 906th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the G.S. case delivered on 21 December 1999 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 26297/95) against Austria, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 9 December 1994 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr G.S., a Austrian national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint concerning the excessive length of certain proceedings concerning civil rights and obligations before administrative authorities and the Austrian Administrative Court;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 3 June 1999;
Whereas in its judgment of 21 December 1999 the Court, unanimously:
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months, 15 000 Austrian schillings in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 35 247,20 Austrian schillings in respect of costs and expenses and that simple interest at an annual rate of 4% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed the remainder of the applicant's claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 21 December 1999, having regard to Austria's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state gave the Committee information about the measures taken preventing new violations of the same kind as that found in the present judgment; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that on 2 March 2000, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 21 December 1999,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of Austria, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2004)77
Information provided by the Government of Austria
during the examination of the G.S. case
by the Committee of Ministers
Following the European Court's judgment, Austrian Parliament adopted the Administrative Reform Act 2001 (Official Law Gazette I No. 2001/65), which entered into force on 20 April 2002 and which aims at alleviating the case-load of the Administrative Court and accelerating administrative proceedings.
According to this Act, in a number of matters of indirect federal administration (mittelbare Bundesverwaltung), appeals against first-instance decisions are to be decided by the independent Administrative Tribunals (unabhängige Verwaltungs-Senate) in the Länder. This Act will apply to all administrative proceedings which began at first instance after its entry into force concerning matters assigned to the independent Administrative Tribunals. The Act also introduced the possibility of having joint hearings and decisions on various applications for licences, approvals and declarations required for a project.
In 2002, legislative measures were also adopted to prevent the Administrative Court from being overburdened by clone cases. According to the new law on the Administrative Court (Federal Law Gazette I No. 124/2002) clone cases are now examined through a special accelerated procedure. As a result, the number of cases pending before the Austrian Administrative Court for more than three years was considerably diminished in 2003.
The ongoing computerisation of administrative practices also contributes to reducing delays in management and processing of cases by the administration and judicial authorities.
The Government of Austria considers that the measures taken will prevent new violations similar to that found in this case and that Austria has therefore fulfilled its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy