CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 23 septembre 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; 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. 111 August-September 2008 Ahtinen v. Finland - 48907/99 Judgment 23.9.2008 [Section IV] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations Decision to transfer a priest to another parish: no violation   Facts : The applicant was a parish priest employed with the Evangelical Lutheran Church. In 1998 the Cathedral Chapter decided to transfer the applicant to another parish situated more than 100 kilometres from his home. The applicant, who had not consented to the transfer, lodged an extraordinary appeal with the Supreme Administrative Court against that decision claiming that the Cathedral Chapter was not impartial and that he had not been able to make representations prior to the adoption of the decision. The Supreme Administrative Court upheld the Cathedral Chapter’s decision without examining the merits of the case after finding that the applicant had been properly heard during the proceedings and that the competent authority disclosed no appearance of bias. Law : Under domestic law the transfer of a priest to another parish may take place with or without his consent. Furthermore, no appeal lay against such a decision since the legislator had not intended to provide for any judicial determination of the merits of grievances filed by clergymen wishing to contest a change in their place of service. Consequently, the appointment and transfer of priests lay exclusively within the discretion of the Cathedral Chapter and, when accepting ecclesiastical employment, parish priests were aware of the possibility that they could later be transferred to another post. In conclusion, the Court found nothing in the domestic law or in its case-law to justify holding that the applicant had had a “right” within the meaning of Article 6. Conclusion : no violation (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