Last Updated on March 30, 2023 by LawEuro
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF PĂTRĂNCUŞ v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 8717/15)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
30 March 2023
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Pătrăncuş v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Tim Eicke, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 9 March 2023,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
1. PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in an application against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 10 February 2015.
2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the application.
2. THE FACTS
3. The applicant’s details and information relevant to the application are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicant complained of the excessive length of civil proceedings.
3. THE LAW
1. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
5. The applicant complained that the length of the civil proceedings in question had been incompatible with the “reasonable time” requirement. He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
6. The Court reiterates that the reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the following criteria: the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the dispute (see Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII).
7. In the leading case of Vlad and Others v. Romania, nos. 40756/06 and 2 others, 26 November 2013, the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
8. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of justifying the overall length of the proceedings at the national level. Having regard to its case‑law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the length of the proceedings was excessive and failed to meet the “reasonable time” requirement.
9. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
2. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
10. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
11. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Vlad and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sum indicated in the appended table and to dismiss the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
4. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
1. Declares the application admissible;
2. Holds that this application discloses a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings;
3. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the amount indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points;
4. Dismisses the remainder of the applicant’s claim for just satisfaction.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 30 March 2023, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Tim Eicke
Acting Deputy Registrar President
__________
APPENDIX
Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(excessive length of civil proceedings)
| Application no. Date of introduction |
Applicant’s name Year of birth |
Start of proceedings | End of proceedings | Total length Levels of jurisdiction |
Domestic court file number | Amount awarded for non‑pecuniary damage per applicant (in euros)[1] |
| 8717/15 10/02/2015 |
Cornel PĂTRĂNCUȘ 1941 |
28/06/2011 | 02/07/2014 | 3 year(s) and 5 day(s) 1 level(s) of jurisdiction |
11275/280/2014 | 1,500 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.
Leave a Reply