SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 19385/24
Attila KISS
against Hungary

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 6 February 2025 as a Committee composed of:

 Gediminas Sagatys, President,
 Stéphane Pisani,
 Juha Lavapuro, judges,

and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 July 2024,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Mr D. Kiss, a lawyer practising in Budapest.

The applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of criminal proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under Article 13 of the Convention.

THE LAW

  1. Complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of criminal proceedings)

In the present application, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the respondent Government cannot be held liable for the protractedness of the proceedings.

In particular, the Court notes that the length of the case was expressly taken into account as an important mitigating factor by the High Court. As a redress, the applicant was sentenced to a prison term five years less than the relevant median (12 years) of the sentencing range.

In view of the above, the Court finds that the applicant can no longer claim to be a victim of a violation of his rights under Article 6 § 1. This complaint is therefore incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

  1. Complaint under Article 13 of the Convention (lack of effective remedy)

The applicant also complained that no effective remedy with regard to the protractedness of the case was available to him, in breach of Article 13 of the Convention.

Given that the complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention has been declared inadmissible, the Court considers that the applicant has no arguable claim of a violation of that Article, so as to bring Article 13 into play.

This complaint is therefore incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Declares the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 6 March 2025.

 

 Attila Teplán Gediminas Sagatys
 Acting Deputy Registrar President


APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

(excessive length of criminal proceedings)

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

 

Representative’s name

and location

Start of proceedings

End of proceedings

Total length

Levels of jurisdiction

Other complaints under well-established case-law

19385/24

04/07/2024

Attila KISS

1985

 

Kiss Dániel Bálint

Budapest

06/12/2018

 

26/09/2024

 

5 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 21 day(s)
2 level(s) of jurisdiction

 

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings