GRAND CHAMBER
CASE OF FABBRI AND OTHERS v. SAN MARINO
 
(Applications nos. 6319/21 and 2 others –
see appended list)
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
Art 6 (civil) • Civil rights and obligations • Ratione materiae • Complaint by victims of alleged offences participating in criminal proceedings that the investigating judge’s inaction led to the time-barring of those offences and thus to the non‑adjudication of their civil claims • Clarification of relevant criteria for the applicability of Art 6 where a right to bring civil claims in the ambit of criminal proceedings is provided for • Requirement for an applicant to have a substantive civil right recognised under domestic law • Victims of a crime must have the possibility to pursue that civil right in the ambit of criminal proceedings and at the relevant stage thereof • Victims must clearly demonstrate that they attached importance to the civil right at issue • Civil right to be invoked and/or pursued through the appropriate channel, in accordance with the tenets of the domestic legal framework • Art 6 applied only if the civil right pursued in the criminal proceedings was not actively pursued in parallel before another court • Criminal proceedings must be decisive for the civil right in issue • Requirements met only with regard to third applicant • Failure of remaining applicants to lodge a formal request to obtain “civil party” status in accordance with domestic law
Art 6 (civil) • Access to court • Clarification of approach to be taken in access to court complaints in relation to civil claims brought in the context of criminal proceedings • Discontinuance of criminal proceedings resulting in the non‑determination of a civil claim does not result in a violation of the right of access to a court if an applicant has an alternative avenue of redress capable of determining that claim • Exceptionally, if a serious dysfunction of the domestic system was the sole or decisive reason of the discontinuance and an applicant pursued the civil claim diligently, in the case-circumstances it might not be reasonable to expect that applicant to pursue any other available civil remedy • Decision in third applicant’s case to discontinue proceedings lawful and not arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable • Unjustified inaction by the investigative authorities as a result of a serious dysfunction afflicting the domestic investigative judicial authority at the material time • Failure to consider third applicant’s civil claims in avenue he chose to pursue not due to circumstances solely or decisively attributable to that dysfunction • Third applicant’s failure to pursue his interests diligently • Possibility to lodge separate civil proceedings following the alleged offence or after the discontinuance of the criminal proceedings • Essence of the right to access to a court not impaired
 
Prepared by the Registry. Does not bind the Court. STRASBOURG
24 September 2024
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. TABLE OF CONTENTS
PROCEDURE
THE FACTS
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE
A. Applications nos. 6319/21 and 6321/21
B. Application no. 9227/21
RELEVANT LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND PRACTICE
I. DOMESTIC LAW AND PRACTICE
A. The Criminal Code
B. The Code of Criminal Procedure
C. Law no. 93/2008
D. Law no. 42/2014
E. Law no. 102/2015
F. Constitutional Court judgment no. 12/2019
II. INTERNATIONAL MATERIAL
A. Council of Europe
B. European Union
III. COMPARATIVE LAW MATERIAL
THE LAW
ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION
A. The Chamber judgment
B. The Government’s preliminary objections before the Grand Chamber
C. Applicability of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention under its civil limb in the context of criminal proceedings
1. The parties’ submissions
(a) The respondent Government
(b) The applicants
(c) The third-party Government
2. The Court’s assessment
(a) General Principles
(b) A recapitulation of the Court’s findings on applicability of Article 6 in its civil limb in the context of criminal proceedings
(c) Relevant considerations
(d) The approach to be taken
(e) Application to the present case
(i) Applications nos. 6319/21 and 6321/21
(ii) Application no. 9227/21
D. Merits
1. The parties’ submissions
(a) The third applicant
(b) The Respondent Government
(c) The third-party Government
2. The Court’s assessment
(a) General principles
(b) The two lines of case-law developed regarding access to a court in relation to civil claims brought in the ambit of criminal proceedings
(c) Relevant considerations
(d) The approach to be taken
(e) Application of the principles to the present case

Article of the Convention at issue: Article 6
Outcome: no_violation