PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 68103/01) against the Federal Republic of Germany lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a German national, Mr Karsten Trippel (“the applicant”), on 12 March 2001.

The applicant was represented by C. Lenz, a lawyer practising in Stuttgart. The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr K. Stoltenberg, Ministerialdirigent, Ministry of Justice.

The applicant complained, inter alia, that the length of the court proceedings before the Federal Constitutional Court exceeded a reasonable time within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

The application was allocated to the Third Section of the Court (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court). Within that Section, the Chamber that would consider the case (Article 27 § 1 of the Convention) was constituted as provided in Rule 26 § 1.

On 14 March 2002 the Third Section declared the application partly inadmissible.

On 20 March 2003, the Third Section declared the applicant's complaint about the length of the proceedings admissible. The applicant and the Government each filed observations on the merits (Rule 59 § 1). The Chamber having decided, after consulting the parties, that no hearing on the merits was required (Rule 59 § 3 in fine), the parties replied in writing to each other's observations.

THE FACTS

The applicant lives in Großbottwar, Germany.

He owned four shares in a company, the MotoMeter AG. 99 % of this company's shares were held by the company Robert Bosch GmbH.

On 6 July 1992, following a majority decision of the shareholders' meeting, the MotoMeter AG sold all its company assets to a newly founded company, the MotoMeter GmbH, and was subsequently liquidated. The majority shareholder offered to buy the minority shareholders' shares at a price of 615 DEM (314.44 EUR) per share.

On 22 July 1992, the applicant and other private shareholders challenged the decision of 6 July 1992 before the Stuttgart Regional Court. They submitted that the main shareholder had circumvented rules aiming at the protection of minority shareholders inherent in the German Act on Stock Companies (Aktiengesetz). They further complained that the price per share offered by the main shareholder was too low and that minority shareholders had not been able to buy parts of the assets.

On 22 January 1993, the Regional Court rejected the claim on the grounds that the decision in question was lawful and that there had been no violation of the applicant's and other shareholders' rights.

On 21 December 1993, the Stuttgart Court of Appeal rejected the appeals lodged by the applicant and the other minority shareholders.

On 5 December 1994, the Federal Court of Justice refused to entertain their appeals on points of law.

On 12 January 1995, the applicant lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Constitutional Court.

On 23 August 2000 (served on 13 September 2000), the Federal Constitutional Court refused to entertain the applicant's complaint, finding that the complaint was not of fundamental constitutional significance. Referring to an earlier decision of the same day dealing with a similar subject matter, which it attached, the Federal Constitutional Court noted that entertaining the complaint was not necessary in order to enforce the applicant's rights. Finally, as the applicant had only possessed four shares of the MotoMeter AG, his financial loss had not posed an existential burden for him.