CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 28 juin 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 } .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 31 June 2001 Ihasniouan v. Spain (dec.) - 50755/99 Decision 28.6.2001 [Section IV] Article 34 Victim Decision in applicant's favour following rejection at first instance of request for legal aid in proceedings concerning pension rights: inadmissible The applicant applied for a pension or allowance as the widow of a retired member of the Spanish army. Her application was rejected on the ground that she was not entitled to such a pension under the applicable domestic legislation. She lodged an administrative appeal with the High Court of Justice. She applied for legal aid, stating that she was not in a position either to conduct her own defence or to instruct counsel to represent her. In August 1997 her application was rejected because it did not satisfy the requirements laid down in the Legal Aid Act. In October 1997 the court requested her to appoint a lawyer within thirty days. The applicant appealed against that order to the same court. In March 1998 the High Court of Justice ordered her appeal to be struck out on account of her failure to appoint counsel. In July 2000 the court, having regard to the judicial-cooperation agreement of 30 May 1997 between Spain and Morocco, set aside its order striking out the appeal and forwarded the applicant’s application for legal aid to the Legal Aid Board. In December 2000 the board granted the applicant legal aid pursuant to the cooperation agreement and assigned her counsel. In her application to the Court, registered in September 1999, she complained that her application for a pension had been rejected and that the court had not considered her appeal against that decision. Inadmissible under Articles 6 § 1 and 14: The decision of December 2000 could reasonably be regarded as just reparation for the consequences of the applicant’s complaint concerning her access to the Spanish courts. Although she had sought to pursue the application, she had not alleged that she had continued to sustain any damage after being granted legal aid. Admittedly, she had also complained of the rejection of her application for a pension. However, that part of her application was premature as the domestic courts had yet to rule on her complaint. In this case, the award of free legal aid constituted sufficient reparation relating in substance to the complaints she had lodged under the Convention. Consequently, the applicant could no longer be regarded as having locus standi and was no longer entitled to claim to be a “victim” of a violation of the Convention.   © 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