Neotown is a RP forum based on the world of neopets!
Administrator
Codes from 
Post by account_disabled on Mar 7, 2024 4:09:40 GMT -5
In 2018, when the case was ready for hearing on appeal, the Registry of the Brussels Court of Appeal informed the plaintiff that his case was on a waiting list and that it could not secure a date before March 2026 . The plaintiff contacted the president of the Court of Appeal to try to get him to review the situation. In 2021, a ruling was issued confirming the initial resolution, issued in 2017. A hearing was then initially scheduled for March 2022, but was later postponed until November 2023, due to the absence of the judge in charge of the matter and the lack of titular judges .
The Belgian Government argued that the plaintiff should have filed a claim for damages arising from the malfunctioning of the Administration of Justice. However, the court replies, it was not able to demonstrate that this action had progressed more Fax Lists quickly and effectively than the main procedure by which the ECtHR was brought, taking into account that it should be processed by the same judicial bodies whose slowness is denounced. . This is without taking into account that the Administration could have opposed that claim, generating a greater delay in compensation for the damage. Therefore, they do not consider that a claim for damages would be effective to compensate for the effects of the excessive slowness of the procedure.
Seven years and eight months after the procedure began, it was still open and without a response. The Government has not provided an explanation for these delays, indicates the ECtHR ruling.
The General Council of the Belgian Judiciary noted in 2018 that a complaint raised by the plaintiff in this regard was correctly founded and that it reflected a dysfunctionality of the judicial system . In this sense, the ECtHR reaffirms the importance of administering justice without delays that put effectiveness and credibility at risk. Excessive delay affects confidence in the judicial system and puts the rule of law at risk, he insists. Furthermore, the system that protects rights under the ECHR does not function properly if national courts fail in their role to administer justice within a reasonable time.
The Belgian Government argued that the plaintiff should have filed a claim for damages arising from the malfunctioning of the Administration of Justice. However, the court replies, it was not able to demonstrate that this action had progressed more Fax Lists quickly and effectively than the main procedure by which the ECtHR was brought, taking into account that it should be processed by the same judicial bodies whose slowness is denounced. . This is without taking into account that the Administration could have opposed that claim, generating a greater delay in compensation for the damage. Therefore, they do not consider that a claim for damages would be effective to compensate for the effects of the excessive slowness of the procedure.
Seven years and eight months after the procedure began, it was still open and without a response. The Government has not provided an explanation for these delays, indicates the ECtHR ruling.
The General Council of the Belgian Judiciary noted in 2018 that a complaint raised by the plaintiff in this regard was correctly founded and that it reflected a dysfunctionality of the judicial system . In this sense, the ECtHR reaffirms the importance of administering justice without delays that put effectiveness and credibility at risk. Excessive delay affects confidence in the judicial system and puts the rule of law at risk, he insists. Furthermore, the system that protects rights under the ECHR does not function properly if national courts fail in their role to administer justice within a reasonable time.