LEO ZAND AGAINST AUSTRIA

Doc ref: 7360/76 • ECHR ID: 001-49231

Document date: June 12, 1979

Doc ref: 7360/76 • ECHR ID: 001-49231

Document date: June 12, 1979

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of

the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the "Convention");

Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of

Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention

relating to the application lodged by Mr Leo Zand against Austria

(No. 7360/76);

Whereas on 10 January 1979 the Commission transmitted the said report

to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months

provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention

has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European

Court of Human Rights, in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the

Convention;

Whereas in his application introduced on 19 December 1975, the

applicant complained that the Salzburg Labour Court, which heard his

case in a labour dispute with his former employers, was not "an

independent tribunal established by law" as required by Article 6,

paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention and that civil rights and

obligations arising in his case were not determined within a

reasonable time;

Whereas the Commission, after having declared the application

admissible on 16 May 1977, considered in its report adopted on

12 October 1978 whether the institutional guarantees in Article 6,

paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention applied to the Salzburg

Labour Court being a court of first instance, whether this court was

"established by law" and "independent" within the meaning of

Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention, and whether the

applicant's case was heard within a "reasonable time";

Whereas the Commission in its report expressed unanimously the opinion

that there was no breach of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the

Convention;

Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance

with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the Convention;

Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the Convention;

Decides that in this case there was no violation of the Convention for

the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant