CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 19 février 1998

.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 } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; 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 No. February 1998 Huber v. France - 26637/95 Judgment 19.2.1998 Article 6 Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations Length of proceedings brought by a civil servant in the State education service to quash decisions whereby he had been sent on compulsory leave and subsequently reinstated in his post and to secure payment of his salary: Article 6 § 1 not applicable [This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions ). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.] Not contested that there had been a “contestation” (dispute) over a “right” – only matter in issue was whether that right was a “civil” one. Disputes relating to recruitment, careers and termination of service of civil servants are as a general rule outside scope of Article 6 § 1. Applicant’s disputes had related essentially to his having been sent on compulsory leave and the consequences of that – they had therefore primarily concerned his career – mere fact that consequences had also been partly pecuniary did not suffice to make proceedings in issue “civil”. Conclusion : Article 6 § 1 not applicable (five votes to four).   © 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