CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 7 août 1996

.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 } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; 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 No. August 1996 Hamer v. France - 19953/92 Judgment 7.8.1996 Article 6 Criminal proceedings Article 6-1 Reasonable time Length of criminal proceedings which applicant joined as a civil party: no violation [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.] Distinction drawn in French law between a civil-party application only and civil-party proceedings in which it is also sought to obtain compensation for damage sustained - admissibility of a civil‑party application does not absolve the person who makes it from the obligation to lodge a compensation claim. Applicant had not claimed damages or made known any intention of so doing - nor had she objected to the settlement reached between the civil parties and the accused - applicant could have claimed damages, even after judgment acquitting the defendant, either in Assize Court or in civil courts. In that respect case had to be distinguished from other similar cases in which outcome of proceedings had been decisive for civil right in question - in the instant case, a contrario , outcome of proceedings had not been decisive for establishment of Ms Hamer’s right to compensation.   As applicant had never asserted that right, there had been no dispute over a civil right. Conclusion : Article 6 not applicable (six votes to three).   © 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