CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 20 juin 2000

.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 19 June 2000 Mauer v. Austria (no. 2) - 35401/97 Judgment 20.6.2000 [Section III] Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Access to court Administrative criminal proceedings: violation Facts : The applicant was instructed to inform the police who had parked his car in a particular place. He failed to provide the information and was fined 2,000 schillings (ATS) for the failure. The penal notice was confirmed by the Regional Government.   The applicant's administrative complaint to the Administrative Court was ultimately dismissed. The court found that the correct provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act had been applied and that the reasons given by the applicant for not having supplied the required information were inadequate. Law : Article 6 § 1 - The issue is the same as in the applicant’s two previous cases, as well as in the cases of Schmautzer, Umlauft, Gradinger, Pramstaller, Palaoro and Pfarrmeier v. Austria (Series A nos.   328A-C and 329A-C), in all of which the Court found a violation of the right of access to a court, given the limited review by the Administrative Court of the decisions of the administrative authorities. There is no reason to follow a different approach in the present case. Conclusion : violation (unanimously). Article 41 - The judgment in itself constitutes just satisfaction in respect of any non-pecuniary damage. As regards the pecuniary damage claimed by the applicant, the Court cannot speculate as to what the outcome of the proceedings might have been if the violation of the Convention had not occurred and thus no award is made in that respect. The Court made an award in respect of costs.   © 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