Monoki and Others v. Hungary

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 31275/24 Károly MONOKI and Others against Hungary

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 5 February 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 21 October 2024,

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 PROCEDURE

The 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”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.

THE LAW

After 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 further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicants’ rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicants the amount 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 amount 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 26 February 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

Other complaints under well-established case-law

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]

31275/24

21/10/2024

(134 applicants)

Károly MONOKI

1956

Lajos Károlyné ÁBRI

1958

Balázsné ÁCS

1965

Tamás Györgyné ANDREKOVICS

1950

Erzsébet BAKONYINÉ LÉKÓ

1960

Istvánné BÁLINT

1941

Jánosné BALOG

1945

Lukácsné BARABÁS

1943

József BÁRÁNDI

1955

Bálnt BARANYA

1966

Sándorné BARÁT

1936

István BÁRDI

1949

Zoltán Józsefné BERTALAN

1956

László BÍRÓ

1961

Istvánné BOLGOVICS

1946

Sándor István BORÓK

1967

Lukács BOTOS

1946

Sándor BOZÓ

1955

Lajos CSÍKI

1958

Ernő CZAKÓ

1942

Mihályné DANYI

1956

Istvánné DEÁK

1956

Lajos DEMETER

1949

István DOMÁNY

1958

Julianna ECSEKINÉ MOLDVAI

1958

Lajosné ÉRI

1938

Attila Péter ERNESZT

1978

Balázs Árpád ERNESZT

1989

Csaba ERNESZT

1980

Lajos ERNESZT

1978

Sándor FÁBIÁN

1963

Imre FARKAS

1935

Ferencné FAZEKAS

1941

Lajos FEHÉR

1972

Pálné FEHÉR

1935

Zoltánné FEHÉR

1970

László FEJÉR

1957

Kálmán FODOR

1957

Józsefné GÁL

1932

Lajosné GÁL

1962

Gyula GÓDOR

1957

Ferenc Gáborné GOLYÁN

1957

Ferencné GULYÁS

1942

Valéria GYETVAI

1965

Aranka HANGAYNÉ FARAGÓ

1962

Judit HEGYMEGINÉ FEHÉR

1974

Miklósné HÉJA

1945

Tünde HÉJA

1972

Ágnes HŐGYE

1973

Piroska HŐGYE

1962

István Csaba JAKAB

1960

Istvánné JAKAB

1968

József JAKAB

1952

Miklósné JÁMBOR

1960

Endre Lajos JÓZSA

1974

Péter JÓZSA

1984

István Péter KALMÁR

1954

Dezső KATONA

1949

József KATONA

1944

Sándor KATONA

1962

Józef Imréné KEŐ

1948

József KEŐ

1975

Endre KIS

1955

Ferenc KIS

1948

Endréné KISS

1953

Gáborné KISS

1966

István KISS

1959

Kálmánné KISS

1945

Zoltán KISS

1974

Istvánné KISZELY

1947

János Géza KLUJBER

1968

Ferenc KÓCZIÁN

1969

Zoltán KÓCZIÁN

1971

György KOCZKA

1973

Dóra KOVÁCS

1981

Józsefné KOVÁCS

1953

Lajos KOVÁCS

1956

Pál KOVÁCS

1951

Sándor KOVÁCS

1964

Judit KOVÁCSNÉ OSZLÁNCZKI

1973

Béla KUN

1950

Sándorné LACZKA

1951

Istvánné LÁNYI

1954

Imre LENGE

1945

Margit LENGÉNÉ TATÁR

1973

János LIMBÓCZKI

1962

János LOVAS

1939

Katalin LOVAS

1954

Sándor LOVAS

1957

Béláné LUKÁCS

1951

Jánosné MAKAI

1946

Ferenc MÁRKI

1958

Zoltán MARSI

1975

János Istvánné MESTER

1951

Béláné MÉSZÁROS

1951

Lászlóné MICSINAI

1945

András MOLNÁR

1953

Benedek Attila MOLNÁR

1953

Sándor MOLNÁR

1958

Kálmán MONOKI

1956

Kálmán NAGY

1944

László NAGY

1946

Attila NYESŐ

1963

Jánosné NYESŐ

1960

Mihály János NYESŐ

1955

Mihályné NYESŐ

1934

Attila OROS

1975

Józsefné OROS

1951

Tiborné PAJTI

1976

Sándorné PÁNTI

1971

Áron László POCSAI

1943

Jánosné POSTÁS

1939

Sándorné PUSKÁS

1952

Attiláné RIMÓCZI

1957

László RIMÓCZI

1953

Imre SÁFÁR

1963

Gábor SÁRKÁNY

1990

Imre SÁRKÁNY

1974

Sándor Endre SÁRKÁNY

1976

Katalin SÁRKÁNYNÉ SZABÓ

1974

Györgyné SERES

1958

Jánosné SZABÓ

1945

Kálmán SZABÓ

1949

László SZABÓ

1958

Lászlóné SZABÓ

1948

Csaba SZOLLÁR

1965

Miklós SZOLLÁR

1958

Tünde SZOMBATINÉ MONOKI

1963

Pálné TÁNCZOS

1951

Kálmánné TÖRŐCSIK

1958

Imre TÓTH

1971

Mária Ildikó VÁRADINÉ ERNESZT

1982

Imréné VÉGH

1955

Zsolt Istvánné ZSOLDOS

1953

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of civil proceedings

06/11/2025

09/12/2025

200

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.