CASE OF DVORSKI v. CROATIA
Hearing: Dvorski v. Croatia (no. 25703/11) (Grand Chamber hearing, 2015-01-21 00:00:00)
Application no.: 25703/11
Document type: GRANDCHAMBER
Document date: 2015-10-20 00:00:00
ECLI: ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:1020JUD002570311
Respondent state: HRV
Articles of the Convention: 6;6+6-3-c;6-1;6-3-c;41
Judges: Dean Spielmann;Dmitry Dedov;Erik Møse;Guido Raimondi;Helen Keller;Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre;Ján Šikuta;Johannes Silvis;Jon Fridrik Kjølbro;Josep Casadevall;Julia Laffranque;Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos;Luis López Guerra;Mark Villiger;Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska;Päivi Hirvelä;Paul Mahoney;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque;Zdravka Kalaydjieva;Ksenija Turković
Represented by: MAROSEVAC CAPKO S.
Issue: Articles 177 § 5 and 502 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
Strasbourg case-law cited: Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979, § 24, Series A no. 32;Aras v. Turkey (no. 2), no. 15065/07, § 62, 18 November 2014;Artico v. Italy, 13 May 1980, § 33, Series A no. 37;Baloga v. Ukraine, no. 620/05, § 38, 16 September 2010;Bykov v. Russia [GC], no. 4378/02, § 103, 10 March 2009;Croissant v. Germany, 25 September 1992, § 29-31, Series A no. 237-B;Dayanan v. Turkey, no. 7377/03, § 32, 13 October 2009;De Jong, Baljet and Van den Brink v. the Netherlands, 22 May 1984, § 48, Series A no. 77;Delcourt v. Belgium, 17 January 1970, § 31, Series A no. 11;Denk v. Austria, no. 23396/09, § 24, 5 December 2013;Erkapić v. Croatia, no. 51198/08, §§ 80-82, 25 April 2013;Goddi v. Italy, 9 April 1984, § 30, Series A no. 76;Gürkan v. Turkey, no. 10987/10, § 26, 3 July 2012;Hanif and Khan v. the United Kingdom, nos. 52999/08 and 61779/08, § 155, 20 December 2011;Horvatić v. Croatia, no. 36044/09, §§ 80-82, 17 October 2013;Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, 24 November 1993, §§ 36-38, Series A no. 275;Klimentyev v. Russia, no. 46503/99, §§ 116-118, 16 November 2006;Lisica v. Croatia, no. 20100/06, § 60, 25 February 2010;Magee v. the United Kingdom, no. 28135/95, § 45, ECHR 2000 VI;Maresti v. Croatia, no. 55759/07, § 75, 25 June 2009;Martin v. Estonia, no. 35985/09, §§ 90-97, 30 May 2013;Mayzit v. Russia, no. 63378/00, 20 January 2005;Meftah and Others v. France [GC], nos. 32911/96, 35237/97 and 34595/97, §§ 45-48, ECHR 2002 VII;Moser v. Austria, no. 12643/02, § 108, 21 September 2006;Panovits v. Cyprus, no. 4268/04, 11 December 2008;Pavlenko v. Russia, no. 42371/02, 1 April 2010;Pishchalnikov v. Russia, no. 7025/04, § 77-79, 24 September 2009;Poitrimol v. France, 23 November 1993, § 31, Series A no. 277-A;Popov v. Russia, no. 26853/04, § 173, 13 July 2006;Prehn v. Germany (dec.), no. 40451/06, 24 August 2010;Salduz v. Turkey [GC], no. 36391/02, ECHR 2008;Sejdovic v. Italy [GC], no. 56581/00, § 86, ECHR 2006-II;Vitan v. Romania, no. 42084/02, §§ 58-64, 25 March 2008;Zagorodniy v. Ukraine, no. 27004/06, §§ 52-55, 24 November 2011
Conclusion: Violation of Article 6+6-3-c - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Fair hearing) (Article 6-3-c - Defence through legal assistance;Legal assistance of his own choosing;Article 6 - Right to a fair trial);Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient (Article 41 - Non-pecuniary damage;Just satisfaction)
Separate opinion: TRUE