Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Van Pelt v. France

Van Pelt v. France 253 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] VAN PELT v. FRANCE Right to a fair trial – violation Articles 6, Sections 1 and 3 Failure of an applicant to appear in court, although in hospital at the time, resulted in the dismissal of his application for an adjournment and his lawyers being refused permission to make submissions on his behalf. This contravened the right of every accused to be effectively represented by a lawyer which is a fundamental feature of the right to a fair trial. An accused did not forfeit that right merely by not being present at the hearing. Declaring an appeal to the Court of Cassation inadmissible solely on the ground that the appellant had failed to comply with a warrant requiring him to surrender to custody constituted an unreasonable interference with his right to a court and thus to his right to a fair trial. In a judgment delivered on 23 May 2000 in the case of Van Pelt v. France , the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been no violation of Article 6 , Section 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights (by five http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Human Rights Case Digest Brill

Van Pelt v. France

Human Rights Case Digest , Volume 11 (5-6): 253 – Jan 1, 2000
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/van-pelt-v-france-tupbQcbQgL

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2000 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0965-934X
eISSN
1571-8131
DOI
10.1163/157181300401346826
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

253 11 hrcd [ 2000 ] VAN PELT v. FRANCE Right to a fair trial – violation Articles 6, Sections 1 and 3 Failure of an applicant to appear in court, although in hospital at the time, resulted in the dismissal of his application for an adjournment and his lawyers being refused permission to make submissions on his behalf. This contravened the right of every accused to be effectively represented by a lawyer which is a fundamental feature of the right to a fair trial. An accused did not forfeit that right merely by not being present at the hearing. Declaring an appeal to the Court of Cassation inadmissible solely on the ground that the appellant had failed to comply with a warrant requiring him to surrender to custody constituted an unreasonable interference with his right to a court and thus to his right to a fair trial. In a judgment delivered on 23 May 2000 in the case of Van Pelt v. France , the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been no violation of Article 6 , Section 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights (by five

Journal

Human Rights Case Digest – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.