CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 12 juin 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 54 June 2003 Gutfreund v. France - 45681/99 Judgment 12.6.2003 [Section III] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations Examination of request for legal aid for criminal proceedings: Article 6 inapplicable Criminal charge Request for legal aid for criminal proceedings: Article 6 inapplicable Facts : The applicant was summoned to appear before the district court charged with a Class 4 minor offence and applied for legal aid. The legal aid office refused his application. On appeal, this decision was upheld by the judge who had already presided over the legal aid office; under the applicable provisions, legal aid could not be granted to a person being prosecuted before the district court for a minor offence other than a Class 5 minor offence. The applicant, who was legally represented, was found guilty but the court gave him a discharge. Law : Article 6 § 1   – The procedure relating to an application for legal aid does not concern either the determination of guilt or the setting of the amount of the penalty and does not affect either the legal substance or the factual substance of a criminal charge. For the applicant, what was at stake in the criminal proceedings was limited: he was prosecuted before a district court for a Class 4 minor offence and faced a maximum fine of 5,000 FRF. The procedure before the district court is “simple”: it is oral and legal representation is not mandatory. In those circumstances, the “interests of justice” did not require that the accused be compulsorily assisted by a lawyer appointed by the court. Thus, the refusal of the application for legal aid was not decisive for the substance of the charge against the applicant. Accordingly, the criminal aspect of Article 6 § 1 does not come into play. As the “interests of justice” within the meaning of Article 6 § 3 (c) do not in this instance require the appointment of a lawyer by the court, the Convention does not guarantee the applicant a right to free assistance by a lawyer appointed by the court; nor, consequently, does it guarantee a right to legal aid. The national legislation on legal aid provides only for the possibility to receive legal aid. That possibility does not appear to constitute a “right” recognised in domestic law. The relevant decree implementing the law does not contain provisions on the grant of legal aid for minor offence proceedings other than for Class 5 offences. The applicant therefore did not have a defensible right recognised in domestic law. The civil aspect of Article 6 § 1 therefore did not come into play. Conclusion : Article 6 inapplicable (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