Case of European Court of Human Rights, September 28, 1995 (case Procola v. Luxemburg)
|Resolution Date:||September 28, 1995|
Violation of Art. 6-1 Pecuniary damage - claim dismissed Costs and expenses award
Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
Procola v. Luxemburg - 14570/89
Civil rights and obligations
Participation in decision on an application to set aside by members of Conseil d'Etat who had earlier given their opinion on the impugned provisions: Article 6 § 1 applicable; violation
[This summary is extracted from the Court’s official reports (Series A or Reports of Judgments and Decisions). Its formatting and structure may therefore differ from the Case-Law Information Note summaries.]
I. ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
Whether there was a dispute concerning a right
Dispute between the parties as to whether ministerial orders fixing milk quantities could be given retrospective effect - applicant association's case sufficiently tenable, since Conseil d'Etat had conducted a detailed examination of the conflicting arguments.
Civil nature of the right in issue
Close connection between proceedings brought by applicant and consequences their outcome might have had for a pecuniary right - by applying to Conseil d'Etat Procola was using only means at its disposal of attempting to obtain reimbursement of additional levies - in any event, payment of additional levies to national authorities could be construed as deprivation of possessions - civil nature of the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions.
Conclusion: Article 6 § 1 applicable (unanimously).
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL