Application No. 20204/92
by Adolf HOLZINGER
against Austria
The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber)
sitting in private on 13 April 1994, the following members being
present:
MM. A. WEITZEL, President
C.L. ROZAKIS
F. ERMACORA
E. BUSUTTIL
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
Mrs. J. LIDDY
MM. M.P. PELLONPÄÄ
B. MARXER
B. CONFORTI
N. BRATZA
I. BÉKÉS
E. KONSTANTINOV
Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 24 March 1992
by Adolf HOLZINGER against Austria and registered on 22 June 1992
under file No. 20204/92;
Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the
Rules of Procedure of the Commission;
Having regard to :
- the Commission's decision of 1 December 1993 to communicate
the application ;
- the settlement agreement submitted by the respondent
Government on 17 March 1994;
- the applicant's letter of 24 March 1994 confirming that he
wished to withdraw the application;
Having deliberated,
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is an Austrian citizen born in 1954. He lives
in Hallein. The facts of the case may be summarised as follows.
On 11 June 1986 the applicant's trustees brought a civil
claim before the Salzburg District Court (Bezirksgericht) against
the Post Office Savings Bank for AS 5,100.57. The Post Office
Savings Bank requested that the proceedings be transferred to
Vienna.
On 8 July 1987 the applicant brought three further sets of
proceedings against the Post Office Savings Bank before the
Salzburg District Court.
The applicant requested that the proceedings be pursued on
12 August 1987.
On 7 September 1987 the Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof)
rejected the application for transfer of the proceedings to
Vienna. On 6 November 1987 the applicant requested that the
trial should begin. On 19 January 1988 the judge suggested that
the proceedings should not be continued. The applicant gives no
reasons for this.
On 9 May 1988 and on 8 July 1988 the applicant asked for the
proceedings to be continued, and on 14 July 1988, by letter, the
judge again suggested that the proceedings should be
discontinued. On 20 July 1988 the applicant requested the
nomination of a bank specialist, and on 15 November 1988 applied
for a new judge on the ground that the then judge was biased.
The application was rejected on 22 November 1988.
On 27 February 1989 the third hearing took place. It was
adjourned to 10 April 1989. On 4 April 1989 the applicant
requested a different date for the third hearing. The request
was rejected on 7 April 1989.
On 15 August 1989 the applicant made a settlement proposal,
and on 15 and 23 November 1989 he requested the hearing of
certain witnesses.
On 27 December 1990 the applicant was heard by a judge in
Hallein and, on 21 May 1991 he made a further request to the
presiding judge at the Salzburg District Court.
On 13 November 1991 the applicant appeared before the judge
in Salzburg. The judge emphasised that there was no point in the
applicant's continuing the proceedings as he had extremely little
chance of success and would have to pay considerable costs. The
judge informed the applicant that the defendant had agreed not
to pursue a claim for costs if the applicant withdrew his claims.
The applicant did so.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complains that the proceedings lasted too
long. He also complains that the courts failed to respond to his
various applications, that he, as plaintiff, was put to proof of
his allegation (and could not therefore establish his claim),
that his various settlement proposals were not accepted, and that
witnesses were not heard.
He alleges violation of Articles 6 para. 1 and 6 para. 3 of
the Convention.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 24 March 1992 and
registered on 22 June 1992.
On 1 December 1993 the Commission (First Chamber) decided
to communicate the application to the Government and to ask for
written observations on the admissibility and merits of the
complaint relating to the length of the proceedings.
On 17 March 1994 the Government submitted a declaration by
the parties in which the parties agreed that the Government would
pay AS 25,000 to the applicant, and the applicant declared that
the application was settled and that he would not make any
further claims in connection with the application.
On 24 March 1994 the applicant confirmed that he wished to
withdraw his application.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes that the parties have come to an agreed
solution to the case, and that the applicant wishes to withdraw
his application.
The Commission finds that the matter has been resolved, and
considers that respect for Human Rights as defined in the
Convention does not require it to continue examination of the
application.
It follows that the application may be struck out of the
list pursuant to Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Commission unanimously
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.
Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First
Chamber
(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (A. WEITZEL)
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy