<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>The effectiveness of procedure is important for parties (e.g. citizens or business entities) to be able to exercise their rights in due time and is a key foundation of the rule of law. A State with an effective legal system provides a business-friendly environment, which is appealing for investments. The State decides on permits, licenses, taxes, etc. by applying administrative procedure. The aim of the paper is to identify and analyse such matters under public (administrative) law at the national level, which – due to their influence on private rights or obligations – fall under the civil or criminal limb of Article 6 of the ECHR and its requirements, as well as the requirements of Article 13. By means of a case study and descriptive-analytical and normative methods, the paper identifies comparatively selected cases and analyses the ECtHR test regarding reasonable time, focusing on overall procedure duration and the awarded compensations. The findings show that the ECtHR does not define reasonable time <italic>in abstracto</italic>. Therefore, the established violations among the states range from two-year procedures to nine years and more, depending on the circumstances of each individual case. Similarly, there are also variations in terms of compensation awarded.</p></abstract>

The effectiveness of procedure is important for parties (e.g. citizens or business entities) to be able to exercise their rights in due time and is a key foundation of the rule of law. A State with an effective legal system provides a business-friendly environment, which is appealing for investments. The State decides on permits, licenses, taxes, etc. by applying administrative procedure. The aim of the paper is to identify and analyse such matters under public (administrative) law at the national level, which – due to their influence on private rights or obligations – fall under the civil or criminal limb of Article 6 of the ECHR and its requirements, as well as the requirements of Article 13. By means of a case study and descriptive-analytical and normative methods, the paper identifies comparatively selected cases and analyses the ECtHR test regarding reasonable time, focusing on overall procedure duration and the awarded compensations. The findings show that the ECtHR does not define reasonable time in abstracto. Therefore, the established violations among the states range from two-year procedures to nine years and more, depending on the circumstances of each individual case. Similarly, there are also variations in terms of compensation awarded.

Procedural Safeguards under the European Convention on Human Rights in Public (Administrative) Law Matters

DANUBE

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

The effectiveness of procedure is important for parties (e.g. citizens or business entities) to be able to exercise their rights in due time and is a key...

Procedural Safeguards under the European Convention on Human Rights in Public (Administrative) Law Matters

Publié en ligne: 01 sept. 2018

Pages: 97 - 116

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2018-0007

Mots clés
Administrative Matters, ECtHR Case Law, Legal Remedy, Just Satisfaction, Reasonable Time, Procedure Effectiveness

© 2018 Tina Sever, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Procedural Safeguards under the European Convention on Human Rights in Public (Administrative) Law Matters

Publié en ligne: 01 sept. 2018

Pages: 97 - 116

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2018-0007

Mots clésAdministrative Matters, ECtHR Case Law, Legal Remedy, Just Satisfaction, Reasonable Time, Procedure Effectiveness

© 2018 Tina Sever, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Mots clés
Administrative Matters, ECtHR Case Law, Legal Remedy, Just Satisfaction, Reasonable Time, Procedure Effectiveness