CEDH · PRESS;ADMISSIBILITYDECISIONS;ENG — 2 décembre 2009

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .s51D316E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s99A63BFE { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sACA0C168 { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:5pt; font-size:11pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4BAE41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s92A5AB2 { font-family:Arial; font-size:11pt; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s9FE28126 { margin-top:0pt; margin-right:42.5pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; font-size:11pt }     910 02.12.2009   Press release issued by the Registrar Decision on admissibility Hartung v. France (application no. 10231/07)   Application inadmissible   Police identity check in a conductor’s dressing room did not interfere with his private life     Principal facts   The applicant, Mr Volker Hartung, is a German national who was born in 1955 and lives in Luxembourg. He is a conductor and at the material time used to manage a company that organised philharmonic concerts.   On 22 February 2005 the company organised a concert at the Palais de la musique et des congrès in Strasbourg in which sixty-two musicians participated.   The Strasbourg public prosecutor had received a tip-off from the Musicians Union to the effect that possible infringements of employment law were being committed by the company, so after the concert the police carried out an identity check of all the participants. As Mr Hartung had already retired to his dressing room, the police checked his papers there before remanding him in custody. He was subsequently charged with employing clandestine workers.   On 15 September 2005, following an application by Mr Hartung, the Colmar Court of Appeal quashed the identity check carried out in the applicant’s dressing room on the ground that the police had undertaken a house search that could not be undertaken after 9 p.m. without the agreement of the person concerned.   Mr Hartung, the Principal Public Prosecutor at the Court of Appeal and the civil party appealed on points of law and on 6 December 2005 the Court of Appeal’s judgment was set aside on the ground that the dressing room could not be regarded as home and that the police officers had therefore acted lawfully on the basis of the Code of Criminal Procedure.   On 20 April 2006 the Nancy Court of Appeal, to which the case had been remitted after the Colmar Court of Appeal’s judgment was quashed, dismissed the plea of nullity regarding the identity check carried out in Mr Hartung’s dressing room. On 23 August 2006, after a new appeal had been lodged with it, the Court of Cassation gave a final ruling confirming that the dressing room could not be regarded as home.         Complaints, procedure and composition of the Court   Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life and for home), the applicant complained of the lack of a legal basis for the identity check carried out in his dressing room, in breach of his right to respect for his “home”. He also complained, under Articles 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security) and 6   § 1 (right to a fair trial), of the unlawfulness of his placement in police custody.   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 23 February 2007.   The decision was given by a Chamber composed as follows:   Peer Lorenzen (Denmark), President , Jean-Paul Costa (France), Karel Jungwiert (Czech Republic), Rait Maruste (Estonia), Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre (Monaco), Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska (“The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”) Zdravka Kalaydjieva (Bulgaria), Judges ,   and also Claudia Westerdiek , Section Registrar .   Decision of the Court   The Court applied an extensive interpretation of “home”, which had been extended to professional premises. However, having regard to the fact that a dressing room was made available to different performers, temporarily and from time to time, the Court had doubts as to whether such premises could be regarded as “home”, whether private or professional, within the meaning of Article 8.   Assuming that such premises could be regarded as home, there had been a legal basis to the identity check and it had pursued the legitimate aim of preventing crime. It had been carried out in accordance with police duties on the basis of a written instruction of the public prosecutor, without the dressing room being searched or any items being seized.   Accordingly, the Court found that the interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life – even assuming that there had been an interference with the applicant’s right to respect for his private life – had not been disproportionate to the aim pursued. The complaint was therefore dismissed as being manifestly ill-founded, as were the complaints based on Articles 5 § 1 and 6   §   1,   no appearance of a violation of those provisions having been establis hed.   ***   The decision is available only in French. This press release is a document produced by the Registry. It does not bind the Court. The judgments are available on its website ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Press contacts Céline Menu-Lange (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 58 77) or Nina Salomon (tel + 33 (0)3 90 21 49 79) Stefano Piedimonte (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 42 04) Tracey Turner-Tretz (tel : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 30) Kristina Pencheva-Malinowski (tel : + 33 (0)3 88 41 35 70) Frédéric Dolt (tel : + 33 (0)3 90 21 53 39)   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.