Stephan BOCK v Germany - 22051/07 [2010] ECHR 139 (19 January 2010)

Stephan BOCK v Germany - 22051/07 [2010] ECHR 139 (19 January 2010)

Given the triviality of the claim, the applicant's financial situation, the lack of a question of principle, and the extensive use of court proceedings, the application was deemed an abuse of the right of application and declared inadmissible under Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

Citation
[2010] ECHR 139
Parties
Applicant: Stephan Bock; Respondent: Germany
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
19 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility
Outcome
application declared inadmissible as abuse of right of application
Legal Topics
Excessive Length of Proceedings, Effective Remedy, Abuse of Right of Application
Human Rights Law Administrative Law Excessive Length of Proceedings Effective Remedy Abuse of Right of Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephan Bock

Applicant

Germany

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Decision on Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the length of proceedings before the Frankfurt (Oder) Administrative Court was excessive under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
  2. 2 Whether German law provides an effective remedy against excessive length of court proceedings under Article 13 of the Convention
  3. 3 Whether the application constitutes an abuse of the right of application under Article 35 § 3 of the Convention

Ratio Decidendi

Given the triviality of the claim, the applicant's financial situation, the lack of a question of principle, and the extensive use of court proceedings, the application was deemed an abuse of the right of application and declared inadmissible under Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

application declared inadmissible as abuse of right of application

Orders

  • Application rejected as a whole pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.