CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 28 août 1991

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. August 1991 F.C.B. v. Italy - 12151/86 Judgment 28.8.1991 Article 6 Article 6-3-c Free legal assistance Legal assistance of his own choosing Accused released from custody, then tried in absence on appeal while subsequently in custody for other reasons in the Netherlands: violation [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] I.   ARTICLE 6 §§ 1 AND 3 (C) OF THE CONVENTION Case concerned solely with the opportunity for a person charged with a criminal offence to attend his trial alongside his counsel. Applicant not present at appeal hearing although charged with very serious crimes and had not expressed the wish to waive attendance at the trial – Assize Court of Appeal informed that he was in prison abroad, but did not adjourn the trial or investigate whether he had indeed consented to not being present. Italian authorities moreover did not draw the necessary inferences from the Netherlands authorities' request to the Italian authorities for cooperation. Not necessary to determine whether indirect knowledge of the trial date allowed presence at the trial: even if such method complies with requirements of Article 6, it does not appear that the applicant, expressly or at least in an unequivocal manner, waived his right to appear and defend himself. Not possible to criticise applicant for not having – taken necessary steps to prove in time that he was indeed unable to attend, as not shown that he knew trial date; – informed the appropriate authority of his change of address after his release from custody: his conduct may give rise to doubts, but the authorities attributed consequences which were manifestly disproportionate. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Non-pecuniary damage: sufficiently compensated by finding of violation. B.   Costs and expenses: claim for reimbursement dismissed as regards proceedings before domestic courts and granted in part for proceedings before Convention institutions. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified amount to applicant (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes