search

… The provision in question reads, in so far as relevant, as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 21.  The Court notes that the application is neither manifestly ill-founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. It must therefore be declared admissible. …

… They thus considered that they had not had a fair trial before an as provided in Article 6 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Admissibility 58.   …

… The applicants complained that the Constitutional Court was not , it having been composed of the same three judges who delivered the judgment of 29 November 2013 and who also rejected their request for a constitutional reference. …

… The applicant alleged that such conduct by the appellate court raised doubts as to its and . He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, which, so far as relevant, reads as follows: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing ... by an and by . ...” A.  Admissibility 57.   …

… The applicant further argued that there were no clear rules regulating to which court a case should be assigned when the case was reassigned to a different first-instance court, unlike the rules regulating a situation when a case was reassigned to another chamber of the same first-instance court, which was contrary to the principle of a by . The applicant alleged that the courts which had decided his case had not been and . 59.   …

… The Government claimed that the Prague Regional Court had to be regarded as a by because it was part of the system of ordinary courts which was vested with, inter alia, the power to administer justice in criminal cases. …

… Article 6 § 1 provides, in its relevant part: “In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” 86.  The Government contested that argument. They pointed out that the applicant’s lawyer had been present at the hearing before the appeal panel on which Judge S.M. had sat. …

… Relying on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complained that the County Court had not been in the defamation proceedings, on account of Judge S.M.’s participation in the appeal panel which had upheld his conviction for defamation. In his view, given her previous involvement in the war crimes case against him and the fact that he had asked for her to be heard in the defamation proceedings, Judge S.M. should have withdrawn from the defamation proceedings. 85.   …

… He relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . ...” Submissions by the parties 27.   …

… THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 26.  The applicant complained that the Bălţi Court of Appeal’s decisions to quash the judgment of 22 May 2006, following an appeal lodged by the opposing party outside of the legal time‑limit, had breached his right to a fair trial. …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ... 3.  Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... (c)  to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; ...” …

… The applicants complained that the judgments in their civil cases had not been “pronounced publicly”, as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant part of which reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . …

… THE JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS 14.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION 15.   …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . …

… The relevant parts of Article 6 read: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ... (c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require; ...” …

… .), everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing (...) by an and by . (...)” 61.  The Government contested that argument. Admissibility 62.  The Government contends that Article 6 § 1 is not applicable to the proceedings in the present case. …