M.S. v. Austria



In the case of M.S. v. Austria (1),

The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights,

constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2),

_______________

Notes by the Registrar

1 The case is numbered 14/1996/633/817. The first number is the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the

relevant year (second number). The last two numbers indicate the

case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its

creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications

to the Commission.

2 Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply

to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9).

_______________

Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 29 March and 23 April 1996,

and composed of the following judges:

Mr L.-E. Pettiti, Chairman,

Mr F. Matscher,

Mr B. Walsh,

and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,

Having regard to the application against the Republic of Austria

lodged with the Court on 6 February 1996 by an Austrian national,

Mr M.S., within the three-month period laid down by Article 32

para. 1 and Article 47 (art. 32-1, art. 47) of the Convention;

Whereas Austria has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the

Court (Article 46 of the Convention) (art. 46) and ratified

Protocol No. 9 (P9) to the Convention, Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends

Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention so as to enable a person,

non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a

complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights ("the

Commission") to refer the case to the Court;

Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court

by either the Government of the respondent State or the Commission

under Article 48 para. 1 (a) or (d) (art. 48-1-a, art. 48-1-d) of the

Convention;

Having regard to the Commission's report of 18 October 1995 on

the application (no. 22048/93) lodged with the Commission by Mr M.S.

on 31 January 1993;

Whereas the applicant, who is serving a prison sentence,

complained of the refusal to allow him to correspond with another

person, and alleged a breach of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention,

which guarantees the right to respect for one's private and family life

and correspondence;

Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his

application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B,

stated that he sought a decision by the Court holding that his rights

under Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention had been violated and

ordering the respondent State to pay him compensation by way of just

satisfaction for the damage that such violation had allegedly caused

him;

Having regard to Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention and

Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,

1 Finds that

(a) the case raises no serious question affecting the

interpretation or application of the Convention, as the

Court has already established case-law on the requirements

of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention with regard to

prisoners' correspondence; and

(b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant

consideration by the Court as, in the event of a finding

that there has been a breach of the Convention, the

Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe can award

the applicant just satisfaction, having regard to any

proposals made by the Commission;

2 Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be

considered by the Court.

Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on

15 May 1996 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.

Signed: Louis-Edmond PETTITI

Chairman

Signed: Herbert PETZOLD

Registrar