Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 64229/01

The Court observes that the court settlement concluded between the applicant and the Fund did not acknowledge any failure to comply with the "reasonable time" requirement within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention or afford the applicant redress in an express and measurable manner (see Jensen v. Denmark (dec.), no. 48470/99, ECHR 2001-X).

Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 64229/01

The Court notes that the word "victim" within the meaning of Article 34 of the Convention refers to the person directly affected by the act or omission at issue; and the existence of a violation is conceivable even in the absence of prejudice (see, inter alia, Van der Sluijs, Zuiderveld and Klappe v. the Netherlands, judgment of 22 May 1984, Series A no. 78, p. 16, § 37).

Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 64229/01

Therefore, the fact that a court settlement concluded between private parties on their own, may have mitigated the disadvantage suffered by the applicant does not in principle deprive him of his status as "victim" (see Inze v. Austria, judgment of 28 October 1987, Series A no. 126, § 32).

Auszug aus EGMR, 10.11.2005 - 64229/01

The position might have been otherwise if, for instance, the national authorities had acknowledged either expressly or in substance, and then afforded redress for, the alleged breach of the Convention (see, inter alia, Eckle v. Germany, judgment of 15 July 1982, Series A no. 51, § 66).