Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent tribunal); No violation of Art. 6-1 (fair trial); Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant was a dairy farmer. Under the scheme operated within the European Community for reducing surplus milk products, he was allocated a milk production quota. His claim for a higher quota was rejected, as was his subsequent appeal before the relevant authorities in his country. He complained that his right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal under Article 6(1) of the Convention had been infringed.
Held: There had been a violation of Article 6.1 in that the applicant’s civil rights and obligations had not been ‘determined’ by a ‘tribunal’ within the meaning of that provision. The binding decision of an impartial tribunal could not be altered by a non-judicial authority to the detriment of an individual. The opportunity to a party to have knowledge and comment must be a genuine one.
(Commission) ‘Article 6(1) extends only to disputes over ‘civil rights and obligations’ which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law. Such a dispute must be genuine and of a serious nature; it may relate not only to the actual existence of a right but also to its scope and the manner of its existence and, finally, the result of the proceedings concerning the dispute at issue must be directly decisive for such a right.
It is not contested that there was a ‘dispute’ concerning a ‘right’ since the allocation of both a milk-quota and an extra levy-free quota conferred a ‘right’ to the applicant to produce a determined quantity of milk, subject to the condition that a levy must be paid for any surplus.
The size of a milk-quota determines for each diary farmer the quantity of milk he is authorised to produce. It is therefore decisive for his income. The fact that in addition a milk-quota is transferable confers to it the character of, in the words the European Court of Human Rights, a ‘pecuniary’ right. Thus the allocation or refusal of a milk-quota may seriously affect a milk producers business activities. A dispute concerning the granting of a higher quota therefore involves the determination of civil rights and obligations within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the Convention.’
Citations:
[1994] ECHR 14, 16034/90, (1994) 18 EHRR 481
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 6
Cited by:
Cited – Williams and Another v Hinton and Another CA 14-Oct-2011
The appellant landlords appealed against the award of damages to their former tenants under the 1985 and 1972 Acts. The judge had proceeded to hear the case in their absence.
Held: The court considered whether the appellants should instead . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Agriculture
Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.165320
