Spain – Constitutional Court, 21 December 2010, 142/2010

Facts:

The applicant was refused asylum in the provisional admission procedure (first stage). An appeal was lodged to the Administrative Court on the 28th July 2009. In response the applicant received a formal court notification scheduling a court hearing on the 15th February 2011, a year and 6 months after the appeal had been lodged.

Decision & reasoning:

The applicant argued that scheduling the court hearing within a period of eighteen months was unreasonable and violated his right to effective judicial protection and the right to have his case heard without undue delay; and that both rights were intimately connected. The applicant added that the delay was particularly relevant in an asylum procedure as the rejection of the application in the provisional admission procedure resulted in the applicant having an irregular immigration status, and could therefore face expulsion from Spanish territory. It was held that both European and national legislation provide that, when determining whether a period set by the Court is or is not considered as an undue delay, the “period scheduled by the Court has to be reasonable”. The discussion turned on the meaning of the concept of “reasonable period”.

The Constitutional Court ruled that the delay occurred as a result of a high workload within the court system. Nevertheless, it stated that this fact does not change the disproportionate nature of the delay, and the contravention of the right to due process and to be heard without undue delay.

Outcome:

The appeal was partially successful: it was declared that the right to have a case heard without undue delay was infringed. Nevertheless, the possibility of bringing the date of the court hearing forward was rejected.

Observations/comments:

The statement of the Constitutional Court is particularly relevant because the Courts’ systems and the length of its processes cause the delay of many asylum cases and/or appeals.