Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
December 1992
Hennings v. Germany - 12129/86
Judgment 16.12.1992
Article 6
Article 6-1
Access to court
Alleged denial of access to a court: no 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
1.Complaint examined under paragraph 1 of Article 6 in the light of the guarantees contained in paragraph 3 which are constituent elements of general notion of fair trial.
2.Authorities cannot be held responsible for barring applicant's access to a court because he failed to take the necessary steps to ensure receipt of his mail and was thereby unable to comply with requisite time-limits laid down under German law.
Conclusion: no violation (eight votes to one).
II.ARTICLE 14 TAKEN TOGETHER WITH ARTICLE 6
Applicant's claim not to have same rights as those who had benefit of trial proceedings subsumed in general complaint that he was denied access to court.
Conclusion: not necessary to examine this complaint (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