t an applicant cannot be blamed for taking full advantage of the resources afforded by the national law in the defence of his interests (see, mutatis mutandis, {Yagci} and {Sargin} v. Turkey, judgment of 8 June 1995, Series A No. 319-A, § 66). It is not disputed that the applicant failed to attend four hearings. However, the resulting delay of four months is insignificant compared to the overall length of the proceedings. Therefore, the applicant cannot be held responsible for any substantial delays in the proceedings.
28. As regards the conduct of the judicial authorities, the Court notes the Government's argument that during the period under consideration the domestic authorities examined the case in several rounds of proceedings. The Court observes in that respect that on 23 June 2003 the appeal court quashed the judgment of the first-instance court because it had rejected a part of the applicant's claim without due reasoning. However, the new decision of the District Court was again quashed on appeal as unlawful, which led to a third round of proceedings. The Court considers that the repeated shifting of the case between several levels of jurisdiction was the main reason for the lengthy examination of the case. Those delays are entirely attributable to the domestic authorities and their failure to examine the case properly. The fact that the domestic courts heard the case several times did not absolve them from complying with the reasonable time requirement of Article 6 § 1 (see Litoselitis v. Greece, No. 62771/00, § 32, 5 February 2004).
29. Furthermore, the Court does not agree with the Government that the domestic courts conducted the proceedings properly. The Court observes that the applicant lodged her claim on 24 February 1998. However, nine months elapsed before the examination of the case was scheduled for 3 December 1998. Of that period more than six months fall under the Court's temporal jurisdiction. In the second round of proceedings, the case was transmitted to the District Court on 31 July 2003; however, it was not until 4 November 2003 that the first hearing was scheduled. The Government did not provide any explanation for those delays. Furthermore, on several occasions (see paragraphs 8 and 16 above) the proceedings were adjourned because the judge or the court's registrar was on sick leave. The accumulated delay amounted to approximately ten months. In this connection, the Court reiterates that it is for Contracting States to organise their legal systems in such a way that their courts can guarantee the right of everyone to obtain a final decision within a reasonable time (see, for instance, {Loffler} v. Austria, No. 30546/96, § 21, 3 October 2000). The manner in which a State provides for mechanisms to comply with this requirement - whether by increasing the numbers of judges, or by automatic time-limits and directions, or by some other method - is for the State to decide. If a State lets proceedings continue beyond the "reasonable time" prescribed by Article 6 of the Convention without doing anything to advance them, it will be responsible for the resultant delay (see Price and Lowe v. the United Kingdom, Nos. 43185/98 and 43186/98, § 23, 29 July 2003). The Court finds that in the present case the authorities did not take due measures to speed up the proceedings and, therefore, the delays resulting from the judge's absence from the hearings are imputable to the State.
30. The Court also notes that on several occasions the hearings were adjourned because the defendant failed to attend, because their representative was on a business trip or because the latter did not have power of attorney to represent the defendant (see paragraphs 9 and 16 above). The accumulated delay amounted to approximately a year. There is no indication that the District Court took any measures to discipline the defendant.
31. In sum, the Court considers that the most s
> 1 2 3 ... 8 9 10 11
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
