CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 17 novembre 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   708 17.11.2006   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING GRAND CHAMBER JUDGMENT   23 November 2006   The European Court of Human Rights will be holding a public hearing in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on Thursday 23 November 2006 at 9.30 a.m. (local time) to deliver the Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Jussila v. Finland (application no. 73053/01).   The press release and the text of the judgment will be available after the hearing on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).     The case concerns an application brought by a Finnish national, Esa Jussila, who was born in 1949 and lives in Tampere (Finland).   On 22 May 1998 the Tax Office (verotoimisto, skattebyrå) in Häme asked the applicant to submit his observations regarding some alleged errors in his value added tax (VAT) declarations (arvonlisävero, mervärdesskatt) for the fiscal years 1994 and 1995.   On 9 July 1998 the Tax Office found that the applicant was, among other things, obliged to pay tax surcharges (veronkorotus, skatteförhöjning) amounting to 10 per cent of the increased tax liability. The additional tax surcharges levied on the applicant totalled 1,836 Finnish Marks, equivalent to 308.80 euros. The tax surcharges were based on the fact that the applicant’s VAT declarations in 1994-1995 were regarded as incomplete.   The applicant appealed to the County Administrative Court (lääninoikeus, länsrätten) of Uusimaa (which later became the Administrative Court of Helsinki; hallinto-oikeus, förvaltningsdomstolen). The applicant requested an oral hearing and that a tax inspector as well as an expert appointed by the applicant be heard as witnesses. On 1 February 2000 the Administrative Court of Helsinki took an interim decision inviting written observations from the tax inspector and a statement from an expert chosen by the applicant. The tax inspector submitted her statement of 13 February 2000 to the Administrative Court. The statement was further submitted to the applicant for his observations. On 25 April 2000 the applicant submitted his own observations on the tax inspector’s statement. The statement of the expert chosen by him was dated and submitted to the court on the same day.   On 13 June 2000 the Administrative Court held that an oral hearing was manifestly unnecessary in the matter because both parties had submitted all the necessary information in writing. It also rejected the applicant’s claims.   On 7 August 2000 the applicant requested leave to appeal from the Supreme Administrative Court renewing at the same time his request for an oral hearing. On 13 March 2001 the Supreme Administrative Court refused the applicant leave to appeal.   The applicant alleges that he did not receive a fair hearing in the proceedings in which a tax surcharge was imposed as he was not given an oral hearing. He relies on Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights.   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 21 June 2001. On 14 February 2006 the Chamber dealing with the case relinquished jurisdiction in favour of the Grand Chamber, in accordance with Article 30 of the Convention.   ***   Press contacts Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.