PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 16174/02) against the Republic of Austria lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by an Austrian national, Mrs Bettina Malek (“the applicant”), on 3 April 2002.

The applicant was represented by her husband, Mr H. Malek, a lawyer practising in Krems. The Austrian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ambassador H. Winkler, Head of the International Law Department at the Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs.

On 21 October 2003 the Court decided to communicate the application. Applying Article 29 § 3 of the Convention, it decided to rule on the admissibility and merits of the application at the same time.

THE FACTS

The applicant was born in 1963 and lives in Krems-Egelsee.

On 30 January 1996 the Krems Municipal Council (Magistrat) asked the applicant to comment on the charge against her as she was suspected of illegal parking.

On 22 February 1996 the applicant, who was assisted by counsel, submitted her comments.

On 8 November 1996 the applicant filed a request to consult inter alia the ordinance upon which the charge was based.

On 20 February 1997 the applicant submitted further comments.

On 5 March 1997 the Municipal Council issued a penal order (Straferkenntnis) against the applicant finding her guilty of illegal parking and imposing a fine of 1,000 Austrian schillings (approximately 70 euros) with sixty hours’ imprisonment in default on her.

On 2 April 1997 the applicant appealed against this decision. On 7 May 1998 the applicant filed further comments.

On 16 June 1998 the Lower Austria Independent Administrative Panel (Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat) dismissed the applicant’s appeal.

On 2 July 1998 the applicant filed a complaint with the Constitutional Court.

On 29 September 1998 the Constitutional Court declined to deal with the applicant’s complaint for lack of prospects of success.

On 12 January 1999 the Constitutional Court, upon the applicant’s request of 22 December 1998, remitted the case to the Administrative Court. On 10 February 1999 the applicant supplemented her complaint with the Administrative Court. On 19 April 1999 the Independent Administrative Panel submitted its comments.

On 25 January 2002 the Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint as being unfounded. This decision was served on the applicant’s counsel on 20 February 2002.