Formal attachment of the courts to the letter of the law affects the core of the fair trial
JUDGMENT
Louli-Georgopoulou v. Greece (no. 22756/09) 16-3-2017
SUMMARY
Access to court. Civil proceeding . Court formality. The case concerned the allegation of extraordinary formalism on behalf of the Athens Court of Appeal. The court declared inadmissible the applicant’s claim to be a civil claimant because the word “heir” was absent from the Proceedings of the Court of First Instance. The European Court of Human Rights considered that the status of the heir although it did not exist in the statement of civil claim was readily apparent from the multitude of documents produced and its disqualification from the proceedings was formal and detrimental to the core of the right of access to a court. It also found an infringement of Article 6 § 1.
PROVISION
Article 6 par. 1
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicant, Ms Dionysia Louli-Georgopoulou, is a Greek national who was born in 1925 and lives in Athens. The case concerned an allegation of excessive formalism on the part of the Athens Court of Appeal. That court had declared inadmissible an application to join some proceedings as a civil party seeking damages on the grounds that the word “heir” was missing from the record of hearing at first instance.
Acting on her own behalf and as legal representative of her husband, who was senile, on 23 May 2002 Ms Louli-Georgopoulou lodged a complaint against three individuals for fraud. Criminal proceedings were instituted and Ms Louli-Georgopoulou applied to join the proceedings as a civil party seeking damages. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou’s husband died in August 2003. In November 2003 the Athens Criminal Court decided not to commit the defendants for trial. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou appealed against that decision as a civil party. The Athens Court of Appeal committed I.M., one of the defendants, for trial. I.M. appealed on points of law. In April 2006 the Court of Cassation held that Ms Louli-Georgopoulou’s appeal was inadmissible, noting that she had appealed “as a civil party”, without specifying whether she was appealing on her own behalf or as her husband’s legal representative. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou lodged an application with the European Court of Human Rights. In a judgment delivered on 31 July 2008 the Court held that the Court of Cassation had taken an excessively formalistic approach towards Ms Louli-Georgopoulou, which had resulted in the inadmissibility of her appeal. It found that there had been a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
In November 2008, on the basis of the judgment delivered by the Court, Ms Louli-Georgopoulou sought to have the criminal proceedings against I.M. reopened. The prosecutor dismissed her application on the grounds that the Code of Criminal Procedure did not provide for a review of criminal proceedings against a person who had been acquitted.
On 5 May 2008 a fresh trial against I.M. started before the Athens Assize Court on another charge of fraud. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou applied to join the proceedings as a civil party. On 26 June 2008, the Assize Court found I.M. guilty and sentenced him to fifteen years’ imprisonment and ordered him to pay Ms Louli-Georgopoulou 44 euros for non-pecuniary damage in her capacity as the victim’s heir. I.M. appealed against the judgment. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou declared herself a civil party on her own behalf and as her husband’s heir. The Court of Appeal declared the application to join the proceedings as a civil party inadmissible on the grounds that her application to join as a civil party at the hearing at first instance was not valid because she had not declared that she was acting as her husband’s heir. Ms Louli-Georgopoulou sought to have the transcript of the judgment rectified in order to include that detail. The President of the Assize Court refused to order rectification. The Court of Appeal sentenced I.M. to six years’ imprisonment for fraud and two years for fraudulently obtaining a false statement and dismissed the applicant’s request for recognition of her status as civil party. On 24 June 2010 the Court of Cassation dismissed an appeal by I.M. against the Court of Appeal’s judgment and an appeal by Ms Louli-Georgopoulou concerning non-recognition of her civil-party status, on the grounds that she did not have standing to act.
Relying in particular on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing), the applicant complained of a violation of her right to a court on account of the excessively formalistic approach taken by the Athens Court of Appeal, which had held that her application to join as a civil party had been inadmissible on the grounds that the word “heir” had been missing from the record of the hearing at first instance, whereas it had been unequivocally clear from all the documents in the file that she had had that status.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Just satisfaction: 3,000 euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage)
