HAJNAL AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY

  SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 19597/25 Tibor HAJNAL and Others against Hungary (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 21 May 2026 as a Committee composed of:  Stéphane Pisani, President,  Juha Lavapuro,  Hugh Mercer, judges, and Attila Teplán, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application against Hungary lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 30 May 2025, Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDUREThe list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants were represented by Mr I. Barbalics, a lawyer practising in Budapest. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings were communicated to the Hungarian Government (“the Government”). THE LAWAfter unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention. The Government acknowledged the excessive length of civil proceedings. They offered to pay the applicants the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay this amount within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declaration several weeks before the date of this decision. The Court has not received a response from the applicants accepting the terms of the declaration. The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if: “... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75‑77, ECHR 2003-VI). The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the excessive length of civil proceedings (see, for example, Gazsó v. Hungary, no. 48322/12, 16 July 2015 and Csatári and Others v. Hungary [Committee], no. 18514/24, 20 May 2025). Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 (c)). In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine). Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 11 June 2026.    Attila Teplán Stéphane Pisani  Acting Deputy Registrar President   APPENDIX Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (excessive length of civil proceedings) Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s comments, if any Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1] 19597/25 30/05/2025 (44 applicants) Tibor HAJNAL 1975 Anita ÁGOSTONNÉ WEKSZLI 1975 Zsolt István ALBERT 1972 Gyöngyi ALBERT -ZARTL 1953 Erika BERZSENYI-RÉDEI 1972 István László BORSICS 1961 Attila Pál EICHINGER 1958 Ágoston FETT 1978 Ferencé FETT 1950 Tamásné FODOR 1936 Józsefné FRÜHWIRT 1950 Lászlóné GANGLER 1950 Violetta GANGLER 1978   Balázs GYENESE 1969 Anna HAJNAL 2006 Lászlóné HAJNAL 1950 Zoltán HAJNAL 1979 Oszkár Zoltán HETTLINGER 1956 Istvánné HORVÁTH 1940 Hajnalka Eszter KÉRINÉ MAITZ 1955 István Gyula KERKÁPOLY 1952 Lászlóné KISS 1974 Veronika KISSNÉ GANGLER 1980 Csaba Norbertné KOVÁCS 1975 Ágnes KOVÁCSNÉ FETT 1971 Gábor Dánielné KÖVÉR 1948 Imre NAGY 1970 István NAGY 1963 Lajos NAGY 1942 Lajosné NAGY 1969   Pál NÉMETH 1935 Tibor Sándor PATAKY 1958 István SOMOGYI 1942 Miklós SOMOGYI 1958 István Gyula SZABÓ 1948 Ildikó SZÉKELY 1954 Margit Éva SZENTÉNÉ BOGDÁN 1953 Anna Lilióza SZILÁGYINÉ MERCS 1956 János TÖRÖK 1965 Klára Lívia TÖRÖKNÉ HETTLINGER 1958 Júlia Anna VARGA 1952 Zsuzsanna VIDA 1976 Miklósné WEKSZLI 1955 Zoltán WEKSZLI 1962   02/03/2026 05/04/2026 200   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.