CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 avril 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s5DD3687 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; vertical-align:super }   Communicated on 6 April 2018   SECOND SECTION Applications nos. 30504/10 and 33134/10 Turan ŞAT against Turkey and Mehmet HORUŞ against Turkey lodged on 28 April 2010 and 29 April 2010 respectively SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applications concern compensation proceedings brought by the applicants together with 16 other claimants against a judge concerning the latter’s alleged use of disrespectful language when addressing the former in criminal proceedings where the applicants and the claimants were the legal counsels of an accused. All claimants including the applicants sought individually a symbolical amount of 200 Turkish Liras (TRY) (approximately 90 euros (EUR) at the material time) against the judge for non-pecuniary damage. On 27 January 2009, the Court of Cassation, which acts as the first-instance court in such proceedings, dismissed the case and ordered each claimant, including the applicants, to pay counter ‑ compensation to the judge in the amount of 250 TRY and imposed a monetary fine for each claimant, including the applicants, in the amount of 500 TRY for bringing an unmeritorious law suit. It follows from the text of that judgment that it was amenable to appeal. On 14 October 2009, however, the General Assembly of the Court of Cassation declared inadmissible ratione valoris the applicants’ appeal, as it found that the value of the subject matter of the dispute was below the statutory limit threshold of 1,400 TRY, and that the value of the subject-matter for each applicant had been 200 TRY. No further appeal lay against this decision. Relying on Article 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention, the applicants complain that the proceedings resulting in the imposition of a fine for bringing an unsuccessful law suit as well as the ordering of a counter ‑ compensation on a discretionary and unilateral basis were incompatible with their right of access to a court.   QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES Did the applicants have a fair hearing in the determination of their civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, in relation to non-pecuniary damages they were ordered to pay to the judge as well as the imposition of the administrative fine, was their right of access to a court unduly restricted?       1. Application no 30504/10   Turan ŞAT is a Turkish national who was born in 1975, lives in Ankara and is represented by G. Zorcu.   2. Application no 33134/10   Mehmet HORUŞ is a Turkish national who was born in 1977, lives in Ankara and is represented by A. Tetik Horuş.