In August 2022, a critical change in ECHR procedure took effect that every potential applicant must know about: the time limit for filing an application with the European Court of Human Rights was permanently reduced from six months to four months. This change — introduced by Protocol No. 15 to the European Convention on Human Rights — has already caused many would-be applicants to lose their right to apply simply because they did not know about it in time. This article explains everything you need to know: when the clock starts, how to calculate your deadline, what exceptions exist, and what happens if you miss it.
The Change: From Six Months to Four Months
The original six-month time limit was a feature of the Convention since its founding. Under Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, applicants had six months from the date of the final domestic decision to file their application with the ECHR. This gave people a reasonable period to obtain copies of court decisions, consult a lawyer, prepare the application, and submit it.
Protocol No. 15 to the Convention, which entered into force on 1 August 2021, amended Article 35 § 1 to reduce this to four months. However, the Court applied a transition rule: the four-month limit applies only to final domestic decisions issued on or after 1 February 2022. For final decisions issued before that date, the old six-month rule continues to apply.
The rationale for the reduction was to encourage applicants — and their lawyers — to act more swiftly and to help the Court reduce its backlog by discouraging delayed applications. Whether this rationale is compelling is debatable, but the rule is now firmly in place.
| Aspect | Old Rule (6 months) | New Rule (4 months, since 01 Aug 2022) |
|---|---|---|
| Legal basis | Art. 35 §1 original | Art. 35 §1 as amended by Protocol 15 |
| Applies from | Final domestic decision | Final domestic decision |
| Cases filed before 01/08/2022 | 6-month rule applies | Not affected |
| Cases filed on/after 01/08/2022 | N/A | 4-month rule applies |
| Extension possible? | No | No |
| Exception for ongoing violations | Yes (clock resets) | Yes (clock resets) |
| Exception for no effective remedy | Special rules apply | Special rules apply |
When Does the Clock Start?
The four-month period begins on the date the final domestic decision is given — not the date you receive it in the post, not the date it is uploaded to a court portal, and not the date you become aware of it.
In most cases, this is the date of the judgment of the highest court that had jurisdiction over your case. For example:
- In the UK: the date of the Supreme Court judgment (or Court of Appeal, if that is the final avenue available)
- In France: the date of the Cour de cassation or Conseil d’État decision
- In Turkey: the date of the Constitutional Court decision on your individual application
- In Romania: the date of the final decision of the Înalta Curte de Casație și Justiție
If the court delivers the decision orally at the hearing but provides the written text later, the clock generally starts from the date of delivery, not the date the written text is issued — unless the written text contains the reasoning without which an appeal is impossible. This is a nuanced point that frequently causes confusion.
In cases where the applicant was not notified of the decision and could not reasonably have known about it, the clock may start from the date of actual or constructive notice. However, this exception is interpreted narrowly.
How to Calculate the Four-Month Deadline
Calculating the deadline correctly is essential. Here are the rules:
- Count calendar months, not days. Four calendar months from 15 March = 15 July.
- If the deadline falls on a weekend or public holiday, the deadline moves to the next working day.
- The application must reach the ECHR Registry by the deadline. Postmarks are not sufficient — the application must be physically received. However, if you send it by registered post sufficiently in advance and there are postal delays beyond your control, the Court has discretion to accept late receipt in exceptional circumstances.
- Electronic filing: The ECHR accepts applications submitted via its online portal (HUDOC-ECHR online application system). Applications submitted electronically are timestamped at the moment of submission, which is considered the date of filing.
Examples of deadline calculation:
| Final Domestic Decision | Applicable Rule | Filing Deadline |
|---|---|---|
| 31 January 2022 | Old 6-month rule | 31 July 2022 |
| 1 February 2022 | New 4-month rule | 1 June 2022 |
| 15 March 2024 | New 4-month rule | 15 July 2024 |
| 30 November 2024 | New 4-month rule | 28 March 2025 (30 March is weekend) |
| Situation | Start of 4-Month Period |
|---|---|
| Final domestic judgment (ordinary courts) | Date of service/notification of written judgment |
| Constitutional court decision | Date judgment is served or published |
| Last available remedy declined | Date of last relevant decision |
| Ongoing violation (e.g., unlawful detention) | Violation must end first; clock starts after |
| No effective domestic remedy | Date of the act/violation itself |
| Applicant represented by lawyer | Date lawyer received/could access judgment |
| Administrative detention | Date of last administrative decision |
Old Rule vs. New Rule: A Comparison
| Aspect | Old Rule (Before 1 Feb 2022) | New Rule (From 1 Feb 2022) |
|---|---|---|
| Time limit | 6 months | 4 months |
| Starting event | Final domestic decision | Final domestic decision |
| Legal basis | Art. 35 § 1 (original) | Art. 35 § 1 as amended by Protocol 15 |
| Transition | Applies to decisions before 1 Feb 2022 | Applies to decisions from 1 Feb 2022 |
| Consequences of breach | Inadmissibility | Inadmissibility |
Exceptions to the Four-Month Rule
The four-month rule is strict, but the ECHR recognises a small number of exceptions:
1. Ongoing Violations (Continuing Situations)
For ongoing violations — violations that are not a one-time event but a continuing state of affairs — there is no single “final domestic decision” from which the clock runs. In such cases, the time limit does not expire as long as the violation continues. Classic examples include a person kept in ongoing unlawful detention, an environmental hazard that continues to damage a person’s health, or a property that continues to be unlawfully occupied by the state.
However, the violation must genuinely be continuing — not simply the long-term consequences of a past violation. If your rights were violated by a specific past act, the time limit runs from that act (or from the final domestic decision on it), even if you continue to suffer its effects.
2. Ineffective Domestic Remedies
Where you pursue a domestic remedy that the ECHR subsequently considers was not “effective” (and therefore not required), the clock does not restart from that non-required remedy’s decision — it may have been running from an earlier point. This can create a situation where you are inadmissible not because you filed too late after the final required remedy, but because the clock started running from an earlier date when you should have realised the remedy you pursued was ineffective.
3. Article 39 Interim Measures in Urgent Cases
In truly urgent situations — where you face imminent deportation, extradition, or other irreparable harm — the time limit does not prevent you from seeking an emergency interim measure under Article 39 (Rule 39) of the Rules of Court. An interim measure request can be submitted urgently, before the full application is finalised, and the Court will process it immediately. However, you must still comply with the time limit when submitting the full application.
What Happens If You Miss the Deadline?
Missing the four-month deadline is fatal to your application. The ECHR will declare the application inadmissible under Article 35 § 4, without examining any other aspect of the case — including whether your rights were actually violated. There is no appeal, no discretion, no hardship exception, and no possibility of revival.
This is why we emphasise again and again: if you believe your rights have been violated, seek legal advice immediately after receiving the final national court decision. Do not wait until you have gathered all documents. Do not wait until you have “thought about it.” Contact a lawyer the same week you receive the final decision.
Protect Your Rights — Act Now
The reduction from six to four months has caught many applicants by surprise. Lawyers who were used to the old six-month window have had to adapt their practice — and individuals representing themselves have been particularly vulnerable to missing the new shorter deadline.
If you have recently received a final domestic court decision and believe your Convention rights were violated, contact our team today for a free 30-minute consultation. We will calculate your exact ECHR deadline, assess your case, and advise on the fastest and most effective path to Strasbourg. Your window is shorter than it used to be — do not let it close.
The Four-Month Rule and Ongoing Domestic Proceedings
A common area of confusion involves cases where domestic proceedings are ongoing at different levels simultaneously. For example, if you have lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court and separately applied for constitutional review, which decision triggers the four-month clock? The answer depends on which remedy the ECHR considers “effective” and “required” in your specific country. If both are required, the clock starts from the last of the two decisions. If only one is required and the other is merely optional or ineffective, the clock may have started earlier.
This is why it is essential to consult an ECHR specialist as soon as you reach the advanced stages of domestic litigation — ideally before any final domestic decision is issued. Planning your ECHR application in advance, rather than scrambling after the final decision, gives you the maximum time to prepare a strong application and minimises the risk of inadvertent deadline breaches.
Similarly, if you are pursuing a claim for compensation through domestic courts while a related criminal or administrative case is ongoing, you must understand which proceedings generate the “final domestic decision” for ECHR purposes. Each limb of a complaint — for example, a complaint about detention conditions under Article 3 and a separate complaint about fair trial rights under Article 6 — may have a different starting date. Our lawyers can map out your specific timeline and ensure every deadline is captured correctly.
