McFarlane v. Ireland (Application no. 31333/06) Judgment, 10 September 2010
Reasonable time requirement and the right to a remedy
The Applicant was charged with criminal offences and brought an application to the European Court arguing that the delay (between 10 and 22 years depending on the account) of the Irish authorities in bringing criminal proceedings against him violated the reasonable time requirement for fair trials under Article 6(1) of the Convention and that he did not have available to him an effective domestic remedy under Article 13 of the Convention in respect of the delay complaint.
The Grand Chamber of the Court, after hearing written and oral submissions from the parties, delivered its Judgment on 10 September 2010.
The Court considered that the overall length of the criminal proceedings were excessive and in violation of Article 6 § 1.
Under Article 13, everyone has the right to an effective domestic remedy for Convention complaints, such as the right to a trial in a reasonable time under Article 6 as argued in this case. The Court considered three issues under this provision: a) whether there was available an effective domestic remedy for Article 6-type complaints, b) the impact of judicial immunity and c) the speed and accessibility (on costs grounds) of the contended remedy.
It concluded that the Government had "not demonstrated that the remedies proposed by them, including an action for damages for a breach of the constitutional right to reasonable expedition, constituted effective remedies available to the applicant in theory and in practice at the relevant time." There had thus "been a violation of Article 13, in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention".