CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 18 mai 2004

.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 } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 64 May 2004 Řehák v. the Czech Republic (dec.) - 67208/01 Decision 18.5.2004 [Section II] Article 35 Article 35-3-a Abuse of the right of application Defamatory allegations about the integrity of certain judges of the European Court and members of its Registry: inadmissible The applicant, who was an anti-communist dissident, was detained in 1980 and criminal proceedings were opened against him. Although the proceedings were discontinued just a few months later, the decision was not served on the applicant until 1995. Prior to this – in 1991 – the applicant instituted proceedings for damages against the State, which are still pending. The applicant, who had previously submitted an application to the Court which had been declared inadmissible by a committee, made serious defamatory accusations against members of the Registry and judges in his correspondence with the Court concerning the present complaint about the length of proceedings. Inadmissible under Article 35 § 3: Although an application may in principle only be rejected as abusive if it was knowingly based on untrue facts, in the present case the allegations were intolerable and misplaced, had exceeded the bounds of normal criticism and had amounted to contempt of court. Even supposing that the applicant's complaint had been substantiated, the applicant's conduct had been contrary to the right of individual petition.   © 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