CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 15 avril 2020

.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 } .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 } Legal summary August 2025 Kuijt v. the Netherlands (relinquishment) - 19365/19   Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Fair hearing Independent tribunal Tribunal established by law Potential participation in deliberations of “reserve justices” not in three-judge formation assigned to determine applicant’s appeal in cassation before the Supreme Court: relinquishment in favour of the Grand Chamber In 2016, the applicant, was convicted of disrupting a municipal council meeting and sentenced to two weeks’ imprisonment by the Court of Appeal. She filed an appeal in cassation limited to procedural conformity and points of law. Under Article   75(3) of the Judiciary (Organisation) Act an appeal in cassation is examined and determined by a formation of three or five members of a multi-judge chamber of the Supreme Court. “Reserve justices” are members of a chamber who do not determine the appeal but participate in the deliberations. According to the Protocol on the participation in the examination and deliberation adopted by the Supreme Court in 2017, such participation is with a view to ensuring legal uniformity. Disagreeing with this practice, the applicant challenged the three judges assigned to her case and the “reserve justices”, i.e. all the other members of the second multi-judge chamber of the Supreme Court. That challenge was dismissed and subsequently, the applicant’s appeal in cassation was rejected. The applicant complains under Article   6 §   1 that since her appeal in cassation was heard by more judges than the statutory defined number, taking into account the potential participation of “reserve justices”, it had not been heard by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. On 26   August 2025 a Chamber of the Court relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber.   © 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 .