Search
document

Document text Analytics

GRABENWARTER v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 21640/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2042

Document date: February 28, 1995

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

GRABENWARTER v. AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 21640/93 • ECHR ID: 001-2042

Document date: February 28, 1995

Cited paragraphs only

Application No. 21640/93

by Ulrike GRABENWARTER

against Austria

The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 28 February 1995, the following members being present:

Mr. C.L. ROZAKIS, President

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. CONFORTI

N. BRATZA

I. BÉKÉS

E. KONSTANTINOV

G. RESS

Mrs. M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 31 March 1993 by

Ulrike Grabenwarter against Austria and registered on 8 April 1993

under file No. 21640/93;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

Having regard to the Commission's decision of 6 September 1994

to communicate part of the application;

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent

Government on 15 December 1994 after an extension of the time limit and

the observations in reply submitted by the applicant on

31 January 1995;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be

summarised as follows.

The applicant, born in 1941, is an Austrian national residing in

Graz. In the proceedings before the Commission she is represented by

Mr. Karlheinz Grabenwarter, a notary public practising in Graz.

In 1982 the applicant bought a farm house and a plot of land in

Bad Gams, Styria. She built a well on her land in order to gain a

supply of drinking water. In early 1985 a couple owning the

neighbouring plot of land, claimed before the Austrian Courts a right

of servitude to use a way on the applicant's property, situated above

the well.

The present case concerns proceedings relating to the applicant's

request to have a water protection zone established on her property,

compensation proceedings brought by her neighbours and further

proceedings regarding the water protection zone.

The third of the above-mentioned set of proceedings was

instituted by the Deutschlandsberg District Administrative Authority

in 1990 in order to have the restrictions imposed on the use of

applicant's property in 1988 reconsidered, in accordance with an

amendment of the Water Rights Act, which had entered into force on

1 July 1990.

On 10 July 1991 the District Administrative Authority changed the

restrictions relating to the water protection zone.

On 27 May 1992 the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry

dismissed the applicant's appeal against this decision.

On 22 September 1992 the Administrative Court, without holding

a hearing as requested by the applicant, quashed the decision by the

Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry, and referred the case back to

the Ministry.

On 12 October 1992 the Constitutional Court dismissed the

applicant's complaint against the Ministry's decision of 27 May 1992

for lack of sufficient prospects of success.

Since 5 November 1992 the proceedings concerning the water

protection zone are pending before the Ministry for Agriculture and

Forestry.

COMPLAINTS

As regards the proceedings concerning the water protection zone,

the applicant complained about their length and also that none of the

authorities involved were independent and impartial tribunals within

the meaning of Article 6 para. 1. Moreover, she complained that on

22 September 1992 the Administrative Court decided without having held

a hearing.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 31 March 1993 and registered

on 8 April 1993.

On 6 September 1994 the Commission decided to communicate part

of the application to the respondent Government for observations on the

admissibility and merits.

On 15 December 1994, after an extension of the time limit, the

Government submitted their observations.

By letter of 31 January 1995, the applicant's representative

stated that in 1993 the real estate concerned by the proceedings

complained about had been acquired by a company to which she was no

longer a partner, and that she no longer wished to pursue her

application.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

The applicant raised several complaints about proceedings

concerning a water protection zone, pending before the Austrian

administrative authorities.

The Commission, having regard to Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the

Convention, notes the applicant's submissions that she is no longer the

owner of the property at issue in these administrative proceedings and

does not, therefore, wish to pursue her application.

Moreover, the Commission finds no reason of a general character

affecting respect for Human Rights, as defined in the Convention, which

require the further examination of the application by virtue of

Article 30 para. 1, in fine, of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the First Chamber President of the First Chamber

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

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant