1. The subject of the dispute was the appeal against the inaction of the High Council of Justice (HCJ) regarding the consideration of the plaintiff’s disciplinary complaint against the actions of a judge.
2. The court dismissed the claim because the HCJ proved the existence of objective circumstances that affected the time frame for considering the complaint, including the heavy workload on the members of the HCJ and disciplinary inspectors; the court also took into account that disciplinary proceedings that had not been resolved before the commencement of the work of the disciplinary inspectors service were transferred to these inspectors, which interrupted the time frame for consideration. The court also noted that the reasonableness of the time frame for considering a disciplinary complaint must be assessed taking into account all the circumstances, and simply prolonging the time frame does not always indicate illegal inaction. The court noted that the deadlines themselves, apart from the specific legal situation, the set of facts, conditions and circumstances under which the events unfolded, are of no importance.
3. The court decided to dismiss the claim in full, finding no illegal inaction in the actions of the High Council of Justice.
