FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 44980/20
Margit MOJZES
against Hungary
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 February 2022 as a Committee composed of:
Alena Poláčková, President,
Raffaele Sabato,
Davor Derenčinović, judges,
and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 September 2020,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.
The applicant was represented by Mr D. Kiss, a lawyer practising in Budapest.
The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.
THE LAW
Complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of criminal proceedings)In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the protraction of the proceedings.
In particular, the Court notes that the case lasted about five years before three levels of jurisdiction which cannot be considered excessive.
In view of the above, the Court finds that these complaints are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.
Remaining complaintsThe applicant also raised a complaint under Article 13 of the Convention.
The Court considers that since the applicant’s complaint about the length of the proceedings is manifestly ill-founded, she does not have an arguable claim of a violation of her rights under Article 6 § 1 for the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention. It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 (a) and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 24 February 2022.
Attila Teplán Alena Poláčková
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(excessive length of criminal proceedings)
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Representative’s name and location
Start of proceedings
End of proceedings
Total length
Levels of jurisdiction
Other complaints under well‑established case-law
44980/20
18/09/2020
Margit MOJZES
1956
Kiss Dániel Bálint
Budapest
16/06/2016
13/07/2021
5 year(s) and 28 day(s)
3 level(s) of jurisdiction
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings