FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 63729/10 Markku Juhani TOLPPANEN against Finland lodged on 19 October 2010

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Markku Juhani Tolppanen, is a Finnish national, who was born in 1952 and lives in Lapinlahti. He is represented before the Court by Mr Markku Fredman, a lawyer practising in Helsinki .

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is a retired man who since 1987 has suffered from a work-related medical condition. In 2001 the insurance company acknowledged that the applicant had a work-related medical condition but did not consider it so severe as to make the applicant eligible for a daily allowance or a disability pension.

In 2006 the applicant lodged a new application for compensation and reimbursement of treatment costs on the basis of new medical information about his condition.

On 6 July 2006 the insurance company refused the applicant ’ s a pplication as his medical condition had not become worse.

On 2 August 2006 the applicant appealed to the Appeal Board for Accidental Injuries ( tapaturma-asioiden muutoksenhakulautakunta, besvärsnämnden för olycksfallsärenden ).

On 28 March 2007 the Appeal Board rejected the applicant ’ s appeal, finding that he was still not eligible for a daily allowance or disability pension.

By letter dated 3 May 2007 the applicant appealed to the Insurance Court ( vakuutusoikeus , försäkringsdomstolen ).

On 15 June 2010 the Insurance Court rejected the applicant ’ s appeal.

The applicant did not appeal any further.

B. Relevant domestic law

The Act on Compensation for Excessive Duration of Judicial Proceedings ( laki oikeudenkäynnin viivästymisen hyvittämisestä, lagen om gottgörelse för dröjsmål vid rättegång; Act no. 362/2009) entered into force on 1 January 2010. The Act provides for a party a right to receive compensation from State funds whenever judicial proceedings concerning that party have been excessively long.

As to its scope of application, section 2, subsection 1, of the Act provides as follows:

“This Act is applicable by general courts to litigious, non-contentious and criminal actions.”

As concerns administrative courts and courts applying the Administrative Judicial Procedural Act ( hallintolainkäyttölaki, förvaltningsprocesslagen , Act no. 586/1996), there is no such possibility available to receive compensation for excessive length, nor is there any possibility to accelerate pending proceedings.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 6 of the Convention that the length of the administrative proceedings was excessive. He complains under Article 13 of the Convention that he did not have any effective remedy against the excessive length.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Was the length of the administrative proceedings in the present case in breach of the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?

2. Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?