Undoubtedly, the target durations set in domestic law may lead to certain hesitations regarding the application of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time, as guaranteed by Article 6 of the ECHR. For instance, if a civil lawsuit is concluded within the target duration prescribed by domestic law, will this definitively preclude the claim of a violation of the right to be tried within a reasonable time? In other words, will the completion of the trial within the set target duration mean that the right to be tried within a reasonable time has not been violated? Because in some cases, a trial might be concluded within the target duration. However, the case might also have been unnecessarily prolonged due to the judicial authority leaving the file inactive. Or, if the set target duration is exceeded, can it be decided that the right to be tried within a reasonable time has not been violated? Indeed, in situations like the complexity of a case, it might be impossible to conclude the trial within the determined target duration. In our opinion, the target durations set in domestic law do not override the criteria that the ECtHR considers when determining whether the reasonable time has been exceeded. Compliance or non-compliance with these durations does not automatically lead to the conclusion that the right to be tried within a reasonable time has been violated or not. However, it is clear that the completion of a trial within the determined target duration will contribute to the formation of a strong presumption that the right to be tried within a reasonable time has not been violated.