FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 37413/22
Lajos KESZEI and Others
against Hungary
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 2 February 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Alena Poláčková, President,
Gilberto Felici,
Raffaele Sabato, judges,
and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 July 2022,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants were represented by Mr I. Barbalics, a lawyer practising in Budapest.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”).
On 18 October 2022 the applicants’ representative informed the Court that Ms Antalné Golács withdrew her complaint.
THE LAW
The Court concludes that the applicant Ms Antalné Golács may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the application (Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention). Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the application in her regard.
Moreover, after unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the remaining applicants’ complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
The Government acknowledged the excessive length of civil proceedings. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay this amount within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.
The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declaration several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declaration.
The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:
“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.
Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75‑77, ECHR 2003-VI).
The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Gazsó v. Hungary, no. 48322/12, 16 July 2015).
Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)).
In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention in regard of Ms Antalné Golács;
Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;
Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 2 March 2023.
Attila Teplán Alena Poláčková
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil proceedings)
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
37413/22
25/07/2022
(89 applicants)
Lajos KESZEI
1939
Gabor VITÁRIS
1943
László KAMMEL
1944
István RAJCSÁNYI
1949
Imre ERDŐS
1946
Zoltán TUJNER
1948
József KOVÁCS
1958
Lajos KOVÁCS
1943
Amália NAGYNÉ BAKOS
1945
Antal BÁCSKAY
1933
Éva Emőke SZENTE
1981
Klára RÉVÉSZ
1945
János GAZDAG
1953
Gábor Ferenc SZALAI
1936
Tibor VARGA
1958
József HURIK
1965
Edina HOLLÓS
1968
József Árpád PIRI
1951
Attila Lászlóné BÁN
1940
Attila LIPNICZKY
1969
Andor PARÁDI
1927
János Csaba PÁLFI
1967
Tiborné MOLNÁR
1945
Ferenc MÁRKUS
1936
József HORVÁTH
1945
Attiláné PÉK
1944
Zita CSERMÁKNÉ JESZENSZKY
1940
János István BÓTH
1949
Tibor László KEPPEL
1942
Józsefné KÖHLER
1957
Ottó HÉRA
1939
Mónika KESZLER
1974
Barnabás BALOGH
1944
Károly HAJDU
1942
Ildikó KOVÁCSNÉ SZABÓ
1983
László Tibor SAMU
1963
Attila MOLNÁR
1942
Lajosné VIDOSICS
1940
Noémi Mária KOCZKA
1971
Gyula Álmosné OROSZ
1943
Edit MOLNÁRNÉ OROSZ
1975
József PETES
1946
Ottóné MILEDER
1932
András Kálmánné NÉMETH
1951
Imre TAKÁCS
1944
Lajosné BARTI
1953
Györgyné BLASKOVICS
1940
Istvánné ZIMONYI
1948
Sándor Ferencné CSIZMADIA
1942
Józsefné KELEMEN
1937
Ferenc MOHÁCSI
1943
Viktória Mária EGRI-MOHÁCSY
1972
Jenőné MOHÁCSY
1942
Ildikó BERCSÉNYINÉ EITL
1974
Tamás Attila MOHÁCSI
1975
Lászlóné NÉMETH
1943
József HABENICHT
1946
Judit GRESZLERNÉ FÜLE
1979
Judit Gizella VÁMOSI
1951
László SZENTÁGOTAI
1937
Gábor BALOGH
1960
József SZABÓ
1956
István Pál DEMETER
1948
Lajos VIDOSICS
1938
Ilona NEDLER
1945
Erika ORSÓ-KAJOS
1979
Gyula Kálmánné KAJOS
1944
Árpád Ferenc TUBOLY
1961
Miklós Pál OLÁH
1944
János KISS
1966
Jánosné GONDOS
1943
Ferencné DÉTÁRI
1938
Tamás KELEMEN
1979
György BRULICH
1947
Ernő TAKÁCS
1944
Mónika Judit NYULNÉ MÁTYÁS
1973
János MISZTI
1949
Alfrédné VINCZE
1939
Lionel MATYI
1974
Jánosné CZUDOR
1945
Gyöngyi GAVALLÉR
1973
Tiborné FEJÉR
1930
Beáta VANDRUSNÉ REINPRECHT
1950
Andrásné CSORDÁS
1936
Elemér MAGYAR
1956
Károly BALÁZS
1937
György BLASKOVICS
1938
Sándor Ferenc CSIZMADIA
1936
László IRSÁN
1964
Barbalics István
Budapest
12/12/2022
09/01/2023
2,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.