Information Note on the Court’s case-law 16

March 2000

Kiefer v. Switzerland - 27353/95

Judgment 28.3.2000 [Section II]

Article 6

Civil proceedings

Article 6-1

Reasonable time

Length of administrative proceedings: violation

Facts : The applicant, an Austrian national, lived in Switzerland from 1979 until 1984 and contributed to the Swiss social security system. After suffering an injury, he requested pension benef its from the Compensation Office, but his claim was rejected in December 1987 on the basis of ten medical reports. In January 1988 the applicant appealed to the relevant Federal Appeals Commission, which upheld his appeal and remitted the case to the Compe nsation Office in October 1988. Numerous further medical reports were obtained. In a preliminary decision in October 1992, the Compensation Office found that the applicant had not been insured when the injury occurred and in April 1993 it dismissed his cla im on that ground. The applicant's appeal was rejected in February 1994 and his administrative law appeal, in which he complained that it had taken ten years to reach the conclusion that he had not been insured, was rejected in November 1994 by the Federal Insurance Court.

Law : Government's preliminary objection (non-exhaustion) - In his administrative law appeal the applicant had complained that it had taken ten years to conclude that he had not been insured, and he had therefore raised in substance his co mplaint about the length of the proceedings.

Article 6 § 1: The proceedings began in January 1988 when the applicant contested the administrative decision not to grant him a pension, and they ended in November 1994. They therefore lasted 6 years, 9 months and 28 days for three levels of jurisdiction. Pension benefits intended to compensate for a disability were at stake and expedition was called for. Even if the case might have been of some complexity, this does not reasonably explain the length. The main d elay was a period of 4½ years from October 1988 to April 1993, including a three year delay which cannot be considered reasonable.

Conclusion : violation (unanimously).

Article 41: The Court found that there was no causal link between the violation and the alleged pecuniary damage. It awarded the applicant 5,000 Swiss francs (CHF) in respect of non-pecuniary damage. It also made an award in respect of costs.

© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.

Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes