scholarly journals The Applicability of the Right to a Fair Trial in Civil Proceedings: The Experience in Ukraine

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-222
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Protection Measures ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Positive Duties ◽  
Judicial Procedures ◽  
The Right ◽  
Substantive Law

In this note, the author attempts to prove that the right to a fair trial is essentially a substantive right; that is, a right that combines the manifestations of a fundamental right. At the same time, this right imposes some positive duties on the State to provide for it. It has national and supranational regulations, and at the same time reflects subjective law and axioms, as well as elements of procedural and substantive law. Attention is drawn to the fact that in Ukraine the legal nature of this right is implemented only partially, since neither legislation nor judicial practice recognize it as an independent object of protection. Taking into account the provisions of Para 1, Art. 6 of the ECHRs and the case law of the ECtHR , the research proposes to define the scope of the applicability of the right to a fair trial proceeding from: (1) legally bound subjects, which may include not only courts within the judicial system of the country concerned on the basis of the law, but also other jurisdictional and quasi-judicial bodies; and (2) the procedures in which the guarantees of a fair trial must be observed. Depending on the existence or absence of a dispute over the rights in them the latter is divided into ‘disputed’, ‘conditionally disputed’ or ‘indisputable’. It is proved that the requirements of Art. 6, Para 1 of the ECHR do not apply to them, but that they are mandatory under the first two procedures. An attempt to analyse the recent positions of the ECtHR on the possibility of including protection measures in the scope of the application is made. Also, the author determines which of those protection measures provided in national law falls within the scope of this regulation. Furthermore, the author draws attention to the fact that the rights and duties to protect a person who is invoked must be ‘civil in nature’ in order to be covered by the guarantees of a fair trial. On the basis of certain criteria the author identifies procedures in the national legal system within which the right to a fair trial must be guaranteed. Keywords: a right to a fair trial, substantive law, scope of applicability of the fair trial right, court, established by law, judicial procedures, legal dispute, diversification of judicial procedures, ‘civilistic’ rights and duties.

scholarly journals Reasonable time frame in bankruptcy proceedings: Analysis of cases from the judicial practice of the Commercial Court in Niš

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (90) ◽  
pp. 97-118
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Mojašević ◽  
Aleksandar Jovanović
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Reasonable Time Frame ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The Act on the Protection of the Right to a Trial within a Reasonable Time, which took effect in 2016, has created the conditions in our legal system for the protection of the right to a trial within a reasonable time, as one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and related international documents. Although the legislator does not explicitly provide for the application of this Act in the context of bankruptcy proceedings, it has been used in judicial practice as a mean for the bankruptcy creditors to obtain just satisfaction in cases involving lengthy bankruptcy proceedings and a violation of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. The subject matter of analysis in this paper is the right to a trial within a reasonable time in bankruptcy cases. For that purpose, the authors examine the case law of the Commercial Court in Niš in the period from the beginning of 2016 to the end of 2019, particularly focusing on the bankruptcy cases in which complaints (objections) were filed for the protection of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time. The aim of the research is to examine whether the objection, as an initial act, is a suitable instrument for increasing the efficiency of the bankruptcy proceeding, or whether it only serves to satisfy the interests of creditors. The authors have also examined whether this remedy affects the overall costs and duration of the bankruptcy proceeding. The main finding is that there is an increasing number of objections in the Commercial Court in Niš, which still does not affect the length and costs of bankruptcy. This trend is not only the result of inactivity of the court and the complexity of certain cases but also of numerous external factors, the most prominent of which is the work of some state bodies.

scholarly journals The Right to a Fair Trial in Automated Civil Proceedings

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-44
Author(s):  
Maria Dymitruk
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
European Court ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Challenges associated with the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in law are one of the most hotly debated issues today. This paper draws attention to the question of how to safeguard the right to a fair trial in the light of rapidly changing technologies significantly affecting the judiciary and enabling automation of the civil procedure. The paper does not intend to comprehensively address all aspects related to the right to a fair trial in the context of the automation of civil proceedings but rather seeks to analyse some legal concerns from the perspective of the Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Section 1 discusses the issues of using artificial intelligence in the justice and automation of the judicial proceedings. Section 2 is devoted to the judge supporting system based on artificial intelligence and psychological requirements of its practical use. Section 3 presents the right to a fair trial in civil cases established by the Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, while subsequent sections characterize its elements with respect to the possibility to automate civil proceedings: a right to have case heard within a reasonable time in section 4 and a right to a reasoned judgment in section 5.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Legal nature of individual proceedings in cases of granting the right to marriage

2021 ◽  
pp. 88-93
Author(s):  
T.M. Balyuk
Keyword(s):  
Family Law ◽  
Adoptive Parent ◽  
Intangible Asset ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Adopted Child ◽  
Legitimate Interest ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Specific Material ◽  
The Right

The scientific article is devoted to the study of the legal nature of separate proceedings in cases of granting the right to marry.It is established that a separate proceeding as a type of non-litigious civil proceedings is characterized by: 1) the absence of a dispute about the right, which, at the same time, does not exclude the existence of a dispute about the fact; 2) a special object of judicial protection – a legally protected (legitimate) interest, which is the needs and aspi-rations to use a specific material and (or) intangible asset, which may or may not be mediated by a certain subjective right. Protection of legally protected (legal) interest is carried out by the court by deciding on the presence or absence of legal facts relevant to the protection of rights, freedoms and interests of a person or creating conditions for the exercise of personal non-property or property rights or confirmation of the presence or absence of undisputed rights.It is determined that a separate proceeding in cases of granting the right to marry is a type of non-litigious civil proceedings for consideration of applications for confirmation of the presence or absence of legal facts that are im-portant for creating conditions for a person’s right to marry. It is substantiated that the legal nature of separate proceedings in cases of granting the right to marry is a set of substantive grounds for granting the right to marry and features of the procedural form of consideration by the court of relevant applications that mediate changes in family law. The court, establishing the presence or absence of legal facts, decides to grant a person the right to marry, thereby expanding the family law capacity of such a person due to the ability to exercise the right to marry before reaching marriageable age or marry between the adopter’s adopted child and the adopted child, as well as between children who have been adopted by an adoptive parent.

Prestaţia compensatorie în Codul civil român

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (2021) ◽  
pp. 164-179
Author(s):  
Flavius Antoniu BAIAS ◽  
◽  
Stela STOICESCU ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Social Utility ◽  
Legal Institution ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
The Right ◽  
Compensatory Payment

This study aims to describe the legal regime of the compensatory payment, with reference to the legislative framework, the sources of inspiration of the regulation, as well as to the current national case-law in this matter, which confirms, by the large number of cases solved after the entry into force of the Civil Code, the social utility of this legal institution. On the basis of the case law examples provided, the authors analyze the legal nature of the compensatory allowance by distinguishing it from similar institutions – the maintenance obligation between ex-spouses or the right to compensation – the conditions to be fulfilled when granting compensatory payment, the criteria used to impose, modify or terminate the obligation, and the substantive and procedural law difficulties of these disputes.

scholarly journals GUARANTEE OF THE RIGHT TO SILENCE AND OF THE RIGHT NOT TO CONTRIBUTE TO ONE’S OWN INCRIMINATION IN ROMANIAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (83) ◽  
pp. 25
Author(s):  
Carmen Adriana Domocos
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
The Right

The Romanian legislation establishes in the new penal procedure law the right to silence and the right of non-incrimination of the defendant in the criminal trial.The right to silence (to remain silent) is the implicit procedural guarantee of the right to a fair trial, which results from the case law of the European Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, according to which judicial authorities cannot oblige a perpetrator (suspected of having committed a criminal offence), a suspect or a defendant to make statements, while having, however, a limited power to draw conclusions against them, from their refusal to make statements.Therefore, the right to silence involves not only the right not to testify against oneself, but also the right of the suspect or defendant not to incriminate oneself. The suspect or defendant cannot be compelled to assist in the production of evidence and cannot be sanctioned for failing to provide certain documents or other evidence. Obligation to testify against personal will, under the constraint of a fine or any other form of coercion constitutes an interference with the negative aspect of the right to freedom of expression which must be necessary in a democratic Romanian society.The right not to contribute to one’s own incrimination (the privilege against self-incrimination) is the implicit procedural guarantee of the right to a fair trial, which results from the case law of the European Court of Justice within the meaning of Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention, according to which judicial bodies or any other state authority cannot oblige a perpetrator (suspected of having committed a criminal offence), a suspect, a defendant or a witness to cooperate by providing evidence which might incriminate him or which could constitute the basis for a new criminal charge. It is essential to clarify certain issues as far as this right is concerned.

Extradition Between European and African Countries: Overcoming the Challenges

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-319
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
African Countries ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Although EU states use the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for the purpose of surrendering a person who is accused of committing an offence or who has been convicted of an offence, they use extradition when dealing with countries outside the EU. However, they use surrender when dealing with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Thus, extradition is one of the ways in which African and European countries (especially EU members) are cooperating in the fight against crime. Case law from courts in some African and European countries and from the European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, shows that extraditions between African and European countries have been delayed or hampered by allegations of human rights violations in the requesting state. These allegations have focused on mainly two rights: the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom from torture. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the extradition of a person should not go ahead if his or her trial was or will amount to a flagrant denial of justice or where there is a real risk of being subjected to torture. Although African courts and international human rights bodies have also held that extradition should not go ahead where there is a real risk that the person will be subjected to torture or where his/her trial will be unfair, they have not adopted the ‘flagrant denial of justice’ test. The case law also shows that some people have challenged the legal basis for their extradition. This article highlights this case law and suggests ways in which some of the challenges associated with extradition could be overcome. The article demonstrates that courts in some African and European countries have considered the nature of extradition enquiries. In some countries, such as Kenya, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings. However, in the United Kingdom, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings of a special type. There is consensus that extradition enquiries are not civil proceedings.

PENALTIES PROVIDED FOR SERIOUS CRIMES IN THE CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandra Skok ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Offenses ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Right ◽  
National Police

The statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office on registered criminal offenses in the form of serious crimes for 2020 and 2021 were reviewed. Based on this, the number of serious crimes registered by the National Police of Ukraine during the reporting periods was determined. The provisions of the current Criminal Code of Ukraine, the Criminal-Executive Code of Ukraine, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court No 7 of October 24, 2003 are analyzed, as well as some scientific positions of domestic scientists Knyzhenko O. O are taken into account. and Berezhnyuk V. M In addition, a review of the case law of the Supreme Court of Cassation on sentencing was studied. A thorough criminal-legal analysis of the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine in the part of punishments established for the category of serious crimes was carried out. Based on the analysis, it was determined which main and additional punishments are regulated in the sanctions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of Ukraine for the investigated category of crimes. The quantitative and qualitative indicator of sanctions for serious crimes has been determined, which include: imprisonment for a definite term; punishments alternative to imprisonment; additional penalties. Legislative and doctrinal provisions on punishments in the form of imprisonment for a definite term, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest are considered. The judicial practice of Ukraine in the part of certain issues related to the execution of a penalty in the form of a fine and the replacement of a penalty in the form of a fine with a penalty in the form of correctional labor is analyzed. It is established that the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in the sanctions of the articles, provides for the application to a person who has committed a serious crime, punishment in the form of imprisonment, restriction of liberty, fine, correctional labor, arrest - as the main punishment. The range of additional punishments is defined, which determine: confiscation of property, deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities and a fine.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

2020 ◽  
pp. 694-706
Author(s):  
Frans Viljoen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time ◽  
Family Code

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights is the newest of the three regional human rights courts. This brief analysis provides an overview of the most salient aspects of the Court’s 2018 case-law with respect to jurisdiction, provisional measures, admissibility, merits decisions, and reparations orders. Continuing its trajectory of increasing productivity, the Court in 2018 handed down the highest number of merits decisions in its brief history. As in previous years, most of these were fair-trial-related cases against Tanzania. The Court’s 2018 case-law contains a number of firsts. In Gombert v. Côte d’Ivoire, the Court for the first time ruled as inadmissible a case previously settled by an African subregional court, the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States. In Anudo v. Tanzania, dealing with the right to nationality, the Court for the first time found a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, on the basis that the Declaration has attained the status of customary international law. In Makungu v. Tanzania, it for the first time ordered the applicant’s release as an appropriate remedy for serious fair trial violations. The Court’s most significant decision of 2018 is the Mali Marriage case, in which it held aspects of the 2011 Malian Family Code to be in violation not only of human rights treaties emanating from the African Union, but also the UN Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document