Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
May 1997
Pauger v. Austria - 16717/90
Judgment 28.5.1997
Article 6
Constitutional proceedings
Article 6-1
Civil rights and obligations
Public hearing
Lack of a public hearing in the Constitutional Court in proceedings concerning entitlement to a survivor's pension: Article 6 § 1 applicable ; 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.]
A.Applicability
Applicant in principle entitled to a survivor's pension - claim in Constitutional Court that transitional provisions under which he was granted only a reduced pension were unconstitutional - there was a "contestation" (dispute) concerning the scope of his rights to a pension and even as to their existence - right in question was civil right - Constitutional Court's judgment directly decisive for his right.
Conclusion: applicable (unanimously).
B.Compliance
1. Austria's reservation
Section 19 (4) of Constitutional Court Act came into force in 1984, whereas Convention was ratified and reservation made in 1958 - no provision like new paragraph 4 of that section in force when reservation made - section not covered by Austria's reservation.
2. Merits of the complaint
Applicant was in principle entitled to a public hearing in the Constitutional Court as the other bodies which ruled on his pension claim were wholly administrative bodies.
However, Constitutional Court did not as a rule hear parties unless one of them expressly asked it to do so - applicant made no such request, although a professor of public law and therefore familiar with Constitutional Court procedure - unequivocally waived his right to a public hearing.
Mr Pauger's application only related to constitutionality of transitional provisions of 1985 Act, which were unfavourable to widowers - question of principle of equality between widows and widowers as regards pension entitlement had already been resolved by Constitutional Court in a previous judgment - case did not raise matter of public interest such as warranted a public hearing.
Conclusion: no violation (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