CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 11 décembre 2003

.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 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 59 December 2003 Schreiber and Boetsch v. France (dec.) - 58751/00 Decision 11.12.2003 [Section I] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations Procedure for challenging a judge: Article 6 inapplicable The applicants were parties claiming damages in criminal proceedings. Having doubts as to the impartiality of the investigating judge at the tribunal de grande instance, they applied for him to be stood down. The president of the appeal court in the same judicial district, who was empowered to investigate that application, dismissed it and ordered the applicants jointly and severally to pay a civil fine of 150 euros. Inadmissible under Article 6: The standing-down procedure was a form of interlocutory proceedings, and independent of the main proceedings. The right to obtain a judicial decision in respect of the replacement of a judge was not a civil right, and the possible applicability of Article 6 § 1 to the main proceedings did not bring the standing-down procedure within this Article’s scope through association. The civil fine imposed on the applicants at the close of the standing-down procedure was a procedural sanction which did not entail the determination of a “civil” right or obligation. In imposing a fine for abuse of the right of application, a court was not ruling on the merits of a “criminal charge”: incompatibility ratione materiae .   © 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