Information Note on the Court’s case-law 21
August 2000
Lambourdière v. France - 37387/97
Judgment 2.8.2000 [Section III]
Article 6
Civil proceedings
Article 6-1
Civil rights and obligations
Withdrawal of invalidity pension of civil servant, an administrative assistant in the social services: Article 6 applicable
Reasonable time
Length of administrative proceedings: violation
Facts: The applicant, an administrative assistant in the social security services, was allowed to retire in November 1985. He had been entitled to a temporary invalidity allowance since 1975. Following a medical examination prior to his retirement, the overall level of partial permanent incapacity applied to him was reduced from 10% to 7%, as his health had improved. That brought him below the threshold laid down by the relevant regulations for entitlement to the invalidity allowance, so that payment of the allowance was stopped. In July 1986 he applied to the administrative court for judicial review. His application having been refused, he appealed in May 1989 to the Conseil d’Etat, which dismissed his appeal in September 1998.
Law: Article 6 § 1 – In order to determine whether Article 6 was applicable to public servants, whether established or employed under individual contracts, a functional criterion was to be applied. In the present case, the applicant’s duties as an administrative assistant in the social security services had not entailed participation in the exercise of powers conferred by public law. Moreover, he had received a temporary invalidity allowance while still employed, and the possibility of continuing to do so after his retirement, the only issue raised in the case, was subject to assessment of his level of incapacity at the time when he retired. Although the administrative authorities had discretion to determine his level of incapacity, once this had been done the termination or continued payment of the allowance were automatic consequences. The administrative authorities had based their decision to stop the applicant’s allowance on the relevant law, without using their discretionary powers. The dispute had therefore been decisive for a civil right and Article 6 was accordingly applicable. As regards the length of the proceedings, the period to be taken into consideration had lasted twelve years and three months at two levels of jurisdiction. It appeared that the protractedness of the proceedings, particularly before the Conseil d’Etat, where the case had remained for more than nine years and three months, had been mainly due to the conduct of the administrative courts.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
Article 41– The Court awarded the applicant FRF 50,000 for non-pecuniary damage.
© 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