CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 27 novembre 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 } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; 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. November-December 1991 Oerlemans v. the Netherlands - 12565/86 Judgment 27.11.1991 Article 6 Article 6-1 Access to court Access to a court to challenge the designation of the applicant's land as a protected natural site: no 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.] APPLICABILITY OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Existence of a dispute (" contestation ") over a right There existed a dispute concerning the lawfulness of the designation order. Moreover, the legal consequences of the order were that the applicant was no longer free to cultivate his land as he saw fit and was required to seek an authorisation from the Minister for various purposes. There thus existed a dispute concerning the restrictions on the applicant's use of his property. B.   The "civil" character of the right in issue In the light of the Court's case-law there can be no doubt that the property right in question was "civil" in nature. Conclusion : Article 6 §   1 applies to the case. C.   Compliance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention Under Netherlands law, case-law establishes that where an administrative appeal to a higher authority is not considered to offer sufficient guarantees as to a fair procedure it is possible to have recourse to the civil courts for a full review of the lawfulness of the administrative decision. Following the Benthem judgment, many authorities considered that the civil courts would be able to examine the lawfulness of any administrative decision coming within the scope of Article 6 against which an appeal lay to the Crown. This view was later upheld by the Supreme Court in various decisions. Dispute could thus have been submitted to the civil courts. Conclusion : no breach (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