003-68242-68710
WyrokETPCz2000-02-29
Analiza orzeczenia
Sekcja wygenerowana przez AI na podstawie treści orzeczenia — nie stanowi cytatu.
Zagadnienie prawne
Czy przewlekłość postępowania administracyjnego trwającego siedem lat i trzy miesiące naruszyła prawo do rozpoznania sprawy w rozsądnym terminie, gwarantowane przez art. 6 ust. 1 Konwencji?Ratio decidendi
Trybunał stwierdził naruszenie art. 6 ust. 1 Konwencji, uznając, że postępowanie administracyjne przeciwko skarżącemu trwało nadmiernie długo (siedem lat i trzy miesiące). Długość postępowania przekroczyła rozsądny termin wymagany przez Konwencję, co stanowiło naruszenie prawa do rzetelnego procesu. Trybunał nie podał szczegółowych kryteriów oceny, ale sam czas trwania postępowania był wystarczający do stwierdzenia naruszenia.Stan faktyczny
Skarżący, João Fernandes Magro, obywatel Portugalii, urodzony w 1958 roku i mieszkający w Bradze, był stroną w postępowaniu administracyjnym. Postępowanie to trwało siedem lat i trzy miesiące, co było przedmiotem jego skargi do Trybunału.Rozstrzygnięcie
Trybunał jednogłośnie stwierdził naruszenie art. 6 ust. 1 Konwencji. Zasądził na rzecz skarżącego 900 000 escudo portugalskich (PTE) za szkodę niemajątkową oraz 250 000 PTE za koszty i wydatki.Pełny tekst orzeczenia
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
148
29.2.2000
Press release issued by the Registrar
CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING PORTUGAL, LITHUANIA, GREECE AND ITALY
The following five chamber judgments have today been notified in writing by the European Court of Human Rights. All but the judgment concerning Portugal are decisions to strike out the case following a friendly settlement.
Section 4
1) Fernandes Magro v. Portugal (application number 36997/97)
João Fernandes Magro, a Portuguese national born in 1958 and living in Braga (Portugal), complained that the administrative proceedings against him lasted seven years and three months. The Court held unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to a fair trial within a reasonable time) and awarded him 900,000 Portuguese escudos (PTE) for non-pecuniary damage and PTE 250,000 for costs and expenses. The judgment exists only in French; it is not final[1].
Section 3
2) Raišelis v. Lithuania (37195/97)
Sigitas Raišelis is a Lithuanian national born in 1968 and living in Penevėžys. He was arrested on 16 June 1997 and released from custody on 30 June. He complained under Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention that his detention was unlawful, that he was not told why he had been detained and that he was not brought promptly before a judge. He will receive 12,000 Lithuanian litai for damage and costs. The judgment exists only in English.
Section 2
3) Dionyssios Petrotos v. Greece (43597/98)
Dionyssios Petrotos is a Greek national born in 1946 and living in Larissa (Greece). He complained that a local authority had not paid the compensation it was ordered to pay following two judgments of 18 July 1994 and 16 January 1997. He invokes Article 6 § 1. He will receive 15 million drachmas. The judgment exists only in French.
Section 2
4) Cesare Galloni v. Italy (39453/98)
Cesare Galloni, an Italian national born in 1946 and living in Rome, complained about the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against him, which lasted from 1 May 1989 until 30 July 1997. He was acquitted. He will receive 26,000,00 Italian lire (ITL) for damage and
ITL 5, 000,00 for costs. The judgment exists only in French.
5) Aggiato v. Italy (36822/97)
Francesco Aggiato, an Italian national born in 1947 and living in Palermo, complained, invoking Article 6 §§ 1 and 3, that he did not have a fair trial and that the length of the criminal proceedings against him was excessive; lasting from 14 May 1992 until 10 March 1997. He was acquitted. He will be paid 11,000,000 Italian Lire for non-pecuniary damage. The judgment exists only in French.
***
The Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site (http://www.echr.coe.int).
Registry of the European Court of Human Rights
F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex
Contacts: Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92)
or Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15)
Fax: (0)3 88 41 27 91
The European Court of Human Rights was set up in 1959 in Strasbourg to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court.
[1] Under Article 43 of the European Convention on Human Rights, within three months from the date of a Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court. In that event, a panel of five judges considers whether the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance, in which case the Grand Chamber will deliver a final judgment. If no such question or issue arises, the panel will reject the request, at which point the judgment becomes final. Otherwise Chamber judgments become final on the expiry of the three-month period or earlier if the parties declare that they do not intend to make a request to refer.
© Rada Europy / Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka, źródło: HUDOC (hudoc.echr.coe.int), pozyskano 13.07.2026. · Źródło