ECtHR rules inconsistent case law not in breach of fair trial rights

In the case of Stanković and Trajković v Serbia, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) considered whether Ms Stanković and Ms Trajković had received a fair trial in the domestic Serbian Courts. The women’s case related to compensation claims following the kidnap and death of the applicants’ husbands.

The applicants in this case contested that their right to a fair trial had been infringed by the inconsistent case law of the Serbian judiciary. They had filed civil claims with comparable facts and involving identical legal questions to various other cases; their case was rejected, while the domestic courts had accepted almost all of the other parallel cases. The applicants argued that the rejection of their case  against the simultaneous acceptance of identical cases in corresponding courts amounted to a breach of Article 6.

However, the ECtHR indicated in its judgment that the prospect of conflicting court decisions was an ‘inherent trait’ of any judicial system. When deviations in different cases arise it cannot be automatically determined to be a violation of an individual’s right to a fair trial. The Court cited Unédic v. France, reasoning that  indeed there are requirements of legal certainty and  safeguards to protect the legitimate confidence of the public in the legal system. However, this should ultimately be balanced with the need to maintain a “dynamic and evolutive approach” to case-law in order to maintain improvements and reform in the legal sphere, as highlighted in Atanasovski v. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

In addition to this the Court stated that there were no profound and long-standing differences in the pertinent case-law, nor was there evident judicial uncertainty. Therefore, it rejected the applicants’ claim that a breach of Article 6 of the European Convention had occurred in this instance.

Click here for the full Stanković and Trajković v Serbia judgment.

Click here for the full Unédic v. France judgment.

Click here for the full judgment Atanasovski v. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia judgment.

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners