Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
April 1998
Daud v. Portugal - 22600/93
Judgment 21.4.1998
Article 6
Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Article 6-3
Rights of defence
Article 6-3-c
Defence through legal assistance
Conduct of criminal proceedings against an alien, in particular effectiveness of officially assigned legal assistance: 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 AND 3 (C) AND (E) OF THE CONVENTION
A.Legal assistance
Intended outcome of Article 6 § 3 (c) had not been achieved in the instant case as accused had not had benefit of practical and effective defence.
Necessary to ascertain whether it had been for relevant authorities, while respecting the fundamental principle of the independence of the Bar, to act so as to ensure that the applicant received the effective benefit of his right, which they had acknowledged – the manifest shortcoming on the part of an officially assigned lawyer and the refusal of applications made by applicant himself had required that the Lisbon Criminal Court should not have remained passive.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
B.Interpreting
No submissions made to Court by either the applicant or the Government or the Delegate of the Commission on question whether there had been a violation of Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (e).
Conclusion: no need to rule on complaint (unanimously).
II.ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION
Non-pecuniary damage: sufficiently compensated by judgment.
Conclusion: finding of violation constituted sufficient just satisfaction (unanimously).
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy