Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF GUSTAFSSON v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 21370/93 • ECHR ID: 001-108

Document date: April 11, 1997

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

CASE OF GUSTAFSSON v. SWEDEN

Doc ref: 21370/93 • ECHR ID: 001-108

Document date: April 11, 1997

Cited paragraphs only

In the case of Lennart Gustafsson v. Sweden (1),

The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,

constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),

_______________

Notes by the Registrar

1. The case is numbered 148/1996/769/966. The first number is the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the

relevant year (second number). The last two numbers indicate the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its

creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications

to the Commission.

2. Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply

to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9).

________________

Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 21 February 1997, and

composed of the following judges:

Mr C. Russo, Chairman,

Mr A. Spielmann,

Mrs E. Palm,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

Having regard to the application against the Kingdom of Sweden

lodged with the Court on 23 October 1996 by a Swedish national,

Mr Lennart Gustafsson, within the three-month period laid down by

Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 of the Convention (art. 32-1,

art. 47);

Whereas Sweden has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of

the Court (Article 46 of the Convention (art. 46)) and ratified

Protocol No. 9 to the Convention (P9), Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends

Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) so as to enable a person,

non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a

complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights

("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;

Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court

by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission

under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) of the Convention (art. 48-1-a,

art. 48-1-d);

Having regard to the Commission's report of 4 September 1996

on the application (no. 21370/93) lodged with the Commission by

Mr Gustafsson on 2 September 1992;

Whereas the applicant complained of a refusal by the

Supreme Insurance Court to hold a public hearing and of the length of

the proceedings, to which he was a party, and alleged a breach of

Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1), under which "In the

determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is

entitled to a ... public hearing within a reasonable time by [a] ...

tribunal ...";

Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his

application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B,

stated that he sought a decision by the Court because the

Supreme Insurance Court, the first and only judicial instance in the

contested proceedings, had - in breach of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1)

- examined his case without his having been able to present his

arguments orally at a public hearing and because the length of the

proceedings in issue had been excessive, as a result of which certain

unemployment benefits had not been paid out to him;

Having regard to Article 48 of the Convention (art. 48) and

Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,

1. Finds that

(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the

interpretation or application of the Convention, as the

Court has already established case-law on the right to a

"public hearing" and on the "reasonable time" requirement

in Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention (art. 6-1); and

(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant

consideration by the Court as, in the event of a finding

that there has been a breach of the Convention, the

Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe can award

the applicant just satisfaction, having regard to any

proposals made by the Commission;

2. Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be

considered by the Court.

Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on

11 April 1997 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: Carlo RUSSO

Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

Registrar

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant