What is the effect of making a criminal case, heard on the same subject as compensation cases arising from torts, a “preliminary issue” on the “right to a trial within a reasonable time”?

As is frequently observed in our domestic legal practice, compensation cases arising from torts are kept pending until the conclusion of the criminal case heard on the same subject. In this regard, the ECtHR criticizes making the conclusion of the criminal case a “preliminary issue,” even though, in domestic law, the civil court is not bound by the final decision of the criminal court. Furthermore, the ECtHR does not accept awaiting the conclusion of the criminal case as a valid excuse preventing the exceeding of a reasonable time. (see Mustafa Türkoğlu/Turkey, 2006, pr.40) A book recommendation.

Why is Expert Lawyer Support Necessary in Individual Applications?

Leaving a compensation case arising from tort pending by awaiting a criminal case can, according to ECtHR jurisprudence, lead to a violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time. However, submitting this violation to an individual application requires considerable technical knowledge and the right strategy.

In the individual application process; determining from which date the reasonable time has been exceeded, explaining the relationship between the criminal case and the civil case, and establishing the link between the necessity of making it a preliminary issue and the violation are mandatory. At this point, it is highly probable to suffer a loss of rights in applications made without the support of an expert lawyer.

The main reasons why expert lawyer support is necessary are as follows:

Calculation of Time: It is vitally important to determine at which stage the reasonable time limit has been exceeded and to submit the application within 30 days.

Submission of Evidence and Documents: Court files, hearing minutes, and sample decisions must be fully attached to the application.

Legal Basis of the Violation: It must be supported by ECHR jurisprudence why the application of a preliminary question leads to a violation of the “right to a trial within a reasonable time.”

Admissibility of the Application: Technical errors or deficiencies may lead to the rejection of the application without examining the merits of the violation.

Therefore, preparing an individual application with the support of an expert lawyer both increases its admissibility and ensures that the violation is strongly presented. This also increases the likelihood of redressing the violation actually experienced by the applicant.