Jozsef TOTH-PAL v Hungary - 1688/06 [2010] ECHR 196 (2 February 2010)
The Court found the friendly settlement to be based on respect for human rights and saw no public policy reasons to continue examining the application, thus striking the case out of its list.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2010] ECHR 196
- Parties
- Applicant: József Tóth-Pál; Respondent: Hungarian Government
- Jurisdiction
- European Union
- Procedural Posture
- Application / Friendly Settlement; Decision to Strike Out
- Outcome
- struck out
- Legal Topics
- Length of Civil Proceedings, Article 6 § 1 ECHR, Friendly Settlement
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
József Tóth-Pál
Applicant
Hungarian Government
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Application / Friendly Settlement; Decision to Strike Out
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the length of civil proceedings violated Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found the friendly settlement to be based on respect for human rights and saw no public policy reasons to continue examining the application, thus striking the case out of its list.
Court Disposition
struck out
Orders
- Application struck out of the list of cases following a friendly settlement.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [ DONATE ] European Court of Human Rights You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Jozsef TOTH-PAL v Hungary - 1688/06 [2010] ECHR 196 (2 February 2010) URL: https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/196.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 196 [ New search ] [ Contents list ] [ Printable RTF version ] [ Help ] SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 1688/06 by József TÓTH-PÁL against Hungary The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on February 2010 as a Chamber composed of: Françoise Tulkens, President, Ireneu Cabral Barreto, Vladimiro Zagrebelsky, Danutė Jočienė, Dragoljub Popović, András Sajó, Nona Tsotsoria, judges, and Sally Dollé, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 December 2005, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The application was lodged by Mr József Tóth-Pál, a Hungarian national who was born in 1962 and lives in Erdőtelek. The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr L. Höltzl, Agent, Ministry of Justice and Law Enforcement. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings to which he was a party. On 14 December 2009 and 8 January 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against the Hungary in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him EUR 6,400 (six thousand four hundred euros) to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into Hungarian forints at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from 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 LAW The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). 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. Sally Dollé Françoise Tulkens Registrar President BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/196.html