CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 3 mai 2023

.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 } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .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 } Legal summary May 2023 Doynov v. Bulgaria (communicated case) - 27455/22   Article 6 Administrative proceedings Article 6-1 Impartial tribunal Supreme Administrative Court’s alleged lack of impartiality to rule on its own liability for alleged violation of EU law: communicated The applicant brought an action to establish liability against the various authorities – the public prosecutor, an administrative court and the Supreme Administrative Court – involved in his placement in police custody in 2015 and in the dismissal of his appeal against the measure in 2018, both of which he considered to be in breach of EU law ( Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings). His action was dismissed by a different administrative court. A subsequent appeal on points of law by the applicant was dismissed by the Supreme Administrative Court, which rejected his objections to the effect that it lacked impartiality, finding that the highest judicial authority could not be replaced and that the bench determining the action to establish liability did not include the judges who had taken part in the first decision. Communicated under Article 6 § 1 (civil) of the Convention. (Compare Mihalkov v. Bulgaria , 67719/01 , §§ 44-51, 10 April 2008, and Quintanel v. France [Committee], 12528/17 , §§ 80-84, 17 June 2021)   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. To access legal summaries in English or French click here . For non-official translations into other languages click here .