CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 11 septembre 2001

.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 34 September 2001 Hammern v. Norway (dec.) - 30287/96 Decision 11.9.2001 [Section III] Article 6 Article 6-2 Presumption of innocence Refusal of compensation and obligation to pay damages despite acquittal: admissible [This summary also covers the decision of the case Ringvold v. Norway , no. 34964/94, 11 September 1994.) The two applicants were charged with sexual abuse. They were acquitted by High Court juries. In the first case, the applicant unsuccessfully claimed compensation. However, he was considered to have failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he had not committed the acts in respect of which he had been acquitted. In the second case, the alleged victim lodged a civil claim for compensation following the applicant’s acquittal and the latter had to pay her damages on the ground that the evidence produced satisfied the standard proof for establishing that sexual abuse had occurred and that on the balance of probabilities it appeared that the applicant had committed acts of abuse. Admissible under Article 6 § 2.     © 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