Application No. 12711/87
by Paul WILFLINGSEDER
against Austria
The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private
on 12 May 1988, the following members being present:
MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President
J.A. FROWEIN
S. TRECHSEL
F. ERMACORA
G. SPERDUTI
E. BUSUTTIL
A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
A. WEITZEL
J.-C. SOYER
H.G. SCHERMERS
H. DANELIUS
G. BATLINER
H. VANDENBERGHE
Mrs. G.H. THUNE
Sir Basil HALL
MM. F. MARTINEZ
C.L. ROZAKIS
Mrs. J. LIDDY
Mr. H.C. KRÜGER Secretary to the Commission
Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to:
- the application introduced on 21 January 1987
by Paul Wilflingseder against Austria and registered on
13 February 1987 under file No. 12711/87;
- the information provided by the respondent Government on
28 April 1987 and the reply submitted thereto by the
applicant on 1 June 1987;
- the first report of August 1987 provided for in Rule 40 of
the Rules of Procedure;
- the Commission's decision of 7 October 1987 to bring the
application to the notice of the respondent Government and
invite them to submit written observations on the
admissibility and merits of the application;
- the Government's submissions of 7 March 1988 and the
applicant's reply of 14 April 1988:
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The facts of the case, which do not appear to be in dispute
between the parties, may be summarised as follows:
The applicant, an Austrian national born in 1916, is a
university professor of surgery and resides in Innsbruck. He is
represented before the Commission by Dr. Ludwig Hoffmann, a lawyer
practising in Innsbruck.
On 25 January 1984 the applicant brought a civil action before
the Salzburg Regional Court (Landesgericht) against Ms. D. for payment
of 104.089,73 AS plus interests and costs. The applicant claimed to
be entitled to compensation for expenses incurred for the
administration of a jointly-owned piece of land.
A hearing took place before the Salzburg Regional Court on
7 June 1984. During this hearing a settlement was reached in respect
of the amount of the claim in dispute, and the subsequent proceedings
were then confined to the merits of the claim. To this end the taking
of certain evidence was ordered.
After a further hearing on 11 December 1984 the proceedings
were then closed and the Court announced that judgment would be
delivered in writing. The judgment dated 21 January 1987 was served
upon the applicant's representative on 17 March 1987.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 6 para. 1 of the
Convention that his case was not decided within a reasonable time in
that, after the proceedings had been closed on 11 December 1984, the
judgment was only delivered on 21 January 1987 and served on the
parties on 17 March 1987. The applicant submitted that the damages he
suffered in view of a loss of interest on account of the length of the
proceedings amounted to 26,000.-AS.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
The application was introduced on 21 January 1987 and
registered on 13 February 1987.
On 10 March 1987 the Secretary to the Commission, upon
instruction by the Rapporteur pursuant to Rule 40 para. 2 (a) of the
Commission's Rules of Procedure, requested the respondent Government
to submit further information on the application.
The information was submitted by the Government on
28 April 1987. The applicant's comments in reply were dated
1 June 1987.
On 7 October 1987 the Commission decided to bring the
application to the notice of the respondent Government and to invite
them to submit observations on its admissibility and merits, pursuant
to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure.
On 7 March 1988 the Government informed the Commission that
they are prepared to reach a solution with the applicant which would
satisfy his claims, in particular by granting him 26,000.-AS for the
damages suffered. On 14 April 1988 the applicant informed the
Commission that in these circumstances he withdraws his application.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The Commission notes that the applicant has withdrawn his
application after a solution has been found with the respondent
Government which satisfies the applicant's claims.
The Commission considers that there are no reasons of a
general interest affecting the observance of the Convention which
would require a further examination of the present application.
For these reasons, the Commission
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES
Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission
(H.C. KRÜGER) (C.A. NØRGAARD)