CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 30 septembre 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 56 September 2003 S.C. v. the United Kingdom (dec.) - 60958/00 Decision 30.9.2003 [Section IV] Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Fair hearing Fitness of an eleven year old boy to plead and stand trial: admissible When he was eleven years old the applicant was charged with attempted robbery and committed for trial before the Crown Court. Two psychiatric reports drawn up before the trial stated that the applicant had learning difficulties and impaired reasoning skills. At the pre-trial hearing, the applicant’s counsel argued that the trial should be stayed as an abuse of process, because the applicant would not be able to understand fully and participate in the trial, given his restricted intellectual abilities. The submission was rejected and the applicant was tried by a judge and jury. Measures were taken to conduct the trial in as informal a manner as possible (the applicant was not required to sit in the dock and the wearing of wigs was dispensed with). He was convicted and sentenced to two and a half years’ detention. The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal. Admissible under Article 6.   © 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