KUDLIČKA v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Inadmissible
Aleš Pejchal;André Potocki;Angelika Nußberger;Helena Jäderblom;Mark Villiger;Vincent A. De Gaetano
The applicant, Mr Petr Kudlička, is a Czech national, who was born in 1940 and lives in Boskovice. He was represented before the Court by Mr Z. Pokorný, a lawyer practising in Brno. The Czech Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Vít A. Schorm, of the Ministry of Justice. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 11 April 2000, the applicant brought an action before the Brno Municipal Court against his former employer, the Czech Post, claiming compensation for wages and travel and subsistence allowances amounting to CZK 8,019 (which at that time corresponded to approximately EUR 220). The substance of the dispute was whether the applicant’s case concerned a business trip or only the employer’s instruction designating a new place of reporting to work. Upon the court’s request, on 27 March and 3 July 2002 the applicant supplemented his action. In his submission of 27 March 2002 he reduced his claim to CZK 6,173 (which by this time, owing to currency fluctuations, was worth about EUR 200). On 10 April 2003, the Municipal Court delivered a judgment in which it granted the action to a large extent. Upon the applicant’s and defendant’s appeals, on 23 November 2004 the Brno Regional Court quashed the judgment and sent the case back to the court of first instance for further proceedings. On 27 April 2006, the Municipal Court delivered a judgment granting the action. Upon the defendant’s appeal, on 20 November 2007 the Regional Court reversed the judgment and dismissed the action. On 28 January 2008, the applicant filed a constitutional appeal, which was dismissed on 11 June 2008. On 21 December 2007, the applicant applied to the Ministry of Justice, claiming compensation for non-pecuniary damage caused by an unreasonable length of the above court proceedings. On 19 November 2008, the Ministry of Justice noted that there had been delays in the court proceedings but did not award compensation to the applicant, considering that the finding of a violation was sufficient in this case. In the meantime, on 27 June 2008 the applicant brought an action for compensation before the Brno Municipal Court, claiming nearly CZK 800,000 (approximately EUR 33,000 at that time). On 28 April 2010, the Municipal Court delivered a judgment awarding the applicant an amount of CZK 10,000 (approximately EUR 390 at that time) for non-pecuniary damage caused by the unreasonable length of the proceedings. Upon the applicant’s appeal, on 21 December 2011 the Brno Regional Court delivered a judgment upholding the judgment of the court of first instance. The relevant domestic law and practice concerning remedies for the allegedly excessive length of judicial proceedings are set out in the Court’s decision in the case of Vokurka v. the Czech Republic (no. 40552/02 (dec.), §§ 11-24, 16 October 2007).