Search
document

Document text Analytics

WAIS v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 19466/92 • ECHR ID: 001-45727

Document date: May 24, 1995

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

WAIS v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 19466/92 • ECHR ID: 001-45727

Document date: May 24, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

FIRST CHAMBER

Application No. 19466/92

Herbert Wais

against

Austria

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 24 May 1995)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PART I : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

PART II : SOLUTION REACHED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under

Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Herbert Wais against Austria on

20 December 1991. It was registered on 31 January 1992 under file

No. 19466/92.

The applicant was represented by Dr. K. Bernhauser, a lawyer

practising in Vienna. The Government of Austria were represented by

their Agent, Ambassador F. Cede, Head of the International Law

Department at the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

2. On 2 September 1994, the Commission (First Chamber) declared the

applicant's complaint about the length of the criminal proceedings

against him admissible and the remainder of the application

inadmissible. It then proceeded to carry out its task under

Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:

"In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to

it:

a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake

together with the representatives of the parties an examination

of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the

effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all

necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the

Commission;

b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of

the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly

settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights

as defined in this Convention."

3. The Commission (First Chamber) found that the parties had reached

a friendly settlement of the case and on 24 May 1995 it adopted this

Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention,

is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution

reached.

The following members were present when the Report was adopted:

Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. E. BUSUTTIL

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

A. PERENIC

C. BÎRSAN

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

4. The applicant is an Austrian national. When lodging his

application, he was detained at a prison in Garsten.

5. In April 1986 information was laid against the applicant and

others on the suspicion of having committed fraud. On 3 September 1986

the applicant was questioned as suspect.

6. On 7 March 1989 the Vienna Public Prosecutor's Office preferred

the bill of indictment, charging the applicant with fraud on three

counts, and false testimony.

7. On 1 February 1990 the Vienna Regional Court opened the trial

against the applicant.

8. On 3 July 1991, following the taking of expert evidence, the

trial was resumed before the Vienna Regional Court. The Regional Court

convicted the applicant of fraud on three counts and of having given

false evidence in the course of civil proceedings. Taking into account

a previous prison sentence, the Court fixed a supplementary sentence

of four years' imprisonment.

9. On 10 July 1991 the Vienna Regional Court, as confirmed by the

Supreme Court on 11 September 1991, rejected the applicant's appeal on

points of law. On 29 October 1991 the Vienna Court of Appeal rejected

the applicant's appeal against the sentence.

10. The written version of the judgment of 3 July 1991 was finalised

on 7 February 1992.

11. The admissible part of the application related to the applicant's

complaint under Article 6 (art. 6) of the Convention about the length

of the criminal proceedings against him.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

12. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,

the Commission (First Chamber) placed itself at the disposal of the

parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance

with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties

to submit any proposals they wished to make.

13. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,

acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to

explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.

14. In their correspondence of 16 September and 28 October 1994, the

parties indicated their willingness to reach a friendly settlement.

15. By letter of 26 January 1995 the Government informed the

Commission that, in their opinion, a friendly settlement of the case

could by reached on the basis of the payment of a sum of money

amounting to AS 45,000. On 8 February 1995, the applicant's

representative informed the Commission that the applicant accepted the

Government's offer.

16. At its session on 24 May 1995, the Commission noted that the

parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.

It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the

Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured

on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.

17. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.

Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber

(M.F. BUQUICCHIO) (C.L. ROZAKIS)

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant