Information Note on the Court’s case-law No.
November 1993
Zander v. Sweden - 14282/88
Judgment 25.11.1993
Article 6
Article 6-1
Access to court
Civil rights and obligations
Lack of access to court to challenge the granting of a refuse-dumping permit to a company on neighbouring land: 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
A.Applicability
1.Existence of a dispute (contestation) over a "right"
Principles of Court's case-law reiterated.
Applicants' claim to Licensing Board was based on statutory provision laying down obligations incumbent on a person engaging in environmentally hazardous activity, without however specifying who is beneficiary of those obligations - nevertheless, they could arguably maintain that they were entitled under Swedish law to protection against water in their well-being polluted as a result of the company's activities on the refuse dump - there was disagreement between applicants and Licensing Board capable of going to the lawfulness of conditions attached to the permit granted - outcome of dispute directly decisive for applicants' above entitlement - accordingly, their appeal to the Government against Licensing Board's decision to grant permit involved a "determination" of one of their "rights".
2.Whether the right at issue was a "civil right"
Applicants' claim was directly concerned with their ability to use water in their well for drinking purposes - such ability was one facet of the right of property - entitlement in issue was a "civil right".
Conclusion: Article 6 § 1 applicable (unanimously).
B.Compliance
Under Swedish law, not possible at material time for applicants to have relevant decision reviewed by a court.
Conclusion: violation (unanimously).
II.ARTICLE 50 OF THE CONVENTION
A.Damage: no claim made for pecuniary damage - award of compensation on equitable basis for non-pecuniary damage.
B.Costs and expenses: partial reimbursement awarded.
Conclusion: respondent State to pay specified sums to the applicants (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