CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 août 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 16 September 2024   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 10462/23 Yahima MENÉNDEZ RAMIRÉZ against Portugal lodged on 1 March 2023 communicated on 29 August 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the rejection of the applicant’s request to be exempted from paying costs and expenses before the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lisbon (CAS), according to Law no. 34/2004. The applicant, an Olympic athlete, signed a contract with the Portuguese Olympic Committee and the Portuguese Judo Federation under which they were required to provide financial assistance to the applicant for the Tokyo Olympic Games. Given the alleged non-compliance with the agreement, the applicant wished to file a compensation action against the Portuguese Olympic Committee and the Portuguese Judo Federation before the CAS. Her request to be exempted from paying costs and expenses before the CAS was dismissed by both the Social Security services and the Santarém Judicial Court (decision dated 28 October 2022) on the grounds that her financial situation did not warrant granting such request. The applicant complains that the refusal to grant her request for exemption from costs and expenses breached her right of access to the CAS under Article   6 § 1 of the Convention. She alleges that the legal aid scheme in Portugal fails to take into account the expensive nature of the proceedings before the CAS.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was Article 6 applicable to the proceedings before the Court of Arbitration for Sport concerning the applicant’s dispute with the Portuguese Olympic Committee and the Portuguese Judo Federation ( see, mutatis mutandis , Mutu and Pechstein v. Switzerland , nos. 40575/10 and 67474/10, § 56, 2 October 2018, and Ali Riza v. Switzerland , no.   7498 9/11, §§   63-65, 13 July 2021)? In particular:   (a)     Was the dispute subject to voluntary arbitration or compulsory arbitration (see Mutu and Pechstein , cited above, §§ 95-96, and Beg S.p.a. v.   Italy , no. 5312/11, §§ 125-27, 20 May 2021)?   (b)     If it was subject to voluntary arbitration, was the applicant’s consent for it given freely? Did the applicant waive her rights under Article   6 §   1 of the Convention and was waiver surrounded by a minimum of guarantees (see, Mutu and Pechstein , cited above, §§ 96, 103 and 113, and Beg S.p.a. v.   Italy , cited above, §§ 125-27)?   2.     If so, considering the amount of court fees which the applicant was required to pay in order to lodge her case before the Court of Arbitration for Sport, was her right to “access to a court” as secured by Article 6   §   1, respected (see   Laçi v. Albania , no. 28142/17, §§ 50-52, 19 October 2021, and Nalbant and Others v. Turkey , no. 59914/16, §§ 32-40, 3 May 2022)?