eu-charter

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights

Article 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial

Article 47 - Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial

Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this Article.
Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law. Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented.
Legal aid shall be made available to those who lack sufficient resources in so far as such aid is necessary to ensure effective access to justice.
  • Text:

    The first paragraph is based on Article 13 of the ECHR:

    ‘Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.’

    However, in Union law the protection is more extensive since it guarantees the right to an effective remedy before a court. The Court of Justice enshrined that right in its judgment of 15 May 1986 as a general principle of Union law (Case 222/84 Johnston [1986] ECR 1651; see also judgment of 15 October 1987, Case 222/86 Heylens [1987] ECR 4097 and judgment of 3 December 1992, Case C-97/91 Borelli [1992] ECR I-6313). According to the Court, that general principle of Union law also applies to the Member States when they are implementing Union law. The inclusion of this precedent in the Charter has not been intended to change the system of judicial review laid down by the Treaties, and particularly the rules relating to admissibility for direct actions before the Court of Justice of the European Union. The European Convention has considered the Union's system of judicial review including the rules on admissibility, and confirmed them while amending them as to certain aspects, as reflected in Articles 251 to 281 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular in the fourth paragraph of Article 263. Article 47 applies to the institutions of the Union and of Member States when they are implementing Union law and does so for all rights guaranteed by Union law.

    The second paragraph corresponds to Article 6(1) of the ECHR which reads as follows:

    ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interests of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.’

    In Union law, the right to a fair hearing is not confined to disputes relating to civil law rights and obligations. That is one of the consequences of the fact that the Union is a community based on the rule of law as stated by the Court in Case 294/83, ‘Les Verts’ v European Parliament (judgment of 23 April 1986, [1986] ECR 1339). Nevertheless, in all respects other than their scope, the guarantees afforded by the ECHR apply in a similar way to the Union.

    With regard to the third paragraph, it should be noted that in accordance with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, provision should be made for legal aid where the absence of such aid would make it impossible to ensure an effective remedy (ECHR judgment of 9 October 1979, Airey, Series A, Volume 32, p. 11). There is also a system of legal assistance for cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

    Source:
    Official Journal of the European Union C 303/17 - 14.12.2007
    Preamble - Explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights:
    These explanations were originally prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Although they do not as such have the status of law, they are a valuable tool of interpretation intended to clarify the provisions of the Charter.
  • Repubblika v Il-Prim Ministru
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (Grand Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:311
  • H. A. v État belge
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (Grand Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Asylum and migration
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:270
  • Diskrimineringsombudsmannen v Braathens Regional Aviation AB
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (Grand Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Employment and social policy
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:269
  • Criminal proceedings against IS
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:292
  • Validity Foundation - Mental Disability Advocacy Centre and Center for Independent Living Association v European Commission
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (Ninth Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:310
  • Armando Carvalho and Others v European Parliament and Council of the European Union
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (Sixth Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Environment
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:252
  • Adler Real Estate and Others
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Advocate General
    Type:
    Opinion
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:219
  • JR
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (First Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:206
  • PI
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (First Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Justice, freedom and security
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:187
  • M.A. v Konsul Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej w N.
    Decision date:
    Deciding body type:
    Court of Justice of the European Union
    Deciding body:
    Court (First Chamber)
    Type:
    Decision
    Policy area:
    Borders and Visa
    ECLI (European case law identifier):
    ECLI:EU:C:2021:186

61 results found

  • Konvention zum Schutze der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten
    Country:
    Austria

    Artikel 6 (1) Jedermann hat Anspruch darauf, daß seine Sache in billiger Weise öffentlich und innerhalb einer angemessenen Frist gehört wird, und zwar von einem unabhängigen und unparteiischen, auf Gesetz beruhenden Gericht, das über zivilrechtliche Ansprüche und Verpflichtungen oder über die Stichhaltigkeit der gegen ihn erhobenen strafrechtlichen Anklage zu entscheiden hat. Das Urteil muß öffentlich verkündet werden, jedoch kann die Presse und die Öffentlichkeit während der gesamten Verhandlung oder eines Teiles derselben im Interesse der Sittlichkeit, der öffentlichen Ordnung oder der nationalen Sicherheit in einem demokratischen Staat ausgeschlossen werden, oder wenn die Interessen von Jugendlichen oder der Schutz des Privatlebens der Prozeßparteien es verlangen, oder, und zwar unter besonderen Umständen, wenn die öffentliche Verhandlung die Interessen der Rechtspflege beeinträchtigen würde, in diesem Fall jedoch nur in dem nach Auffassung des Gerichts erforderlichen Umfang. (3) Jeder Angeklagte hat mindestens (englischer Text) insbesondere (französischer Text) die folgenden Rechte: a) in möglichst kurzer Frist in einer für ihn verständlichen Sprache in allen Einzelheiten über die Art und den Grund der gegen ihn erhobenen Beschuldigung in Kenntnis gesetzt zu werden; b) über ausreichende Zeit und Gelegenheit zur Vorbereitung seiner Verteidigung zu verfügen; c) sich selbst zu verteidigen oder den Beistand eines Verteidigers seiner Wahl zu erhalten und, falls er nicht über die Mittel zur Bezahlung eines Verteidigers verfügt, unentgeltlich den Beistand eines Pflichtverteidigers zu erhalten, wenn dies im Interesse der Rechtspflege erforderlich ist; d) Fragen an die Belastungszeugen zu stellen oder stellen zu lassen und die Ladung und Vernehmung der Entlastungszeugen unter denselben Bedingungen wie die der Belastungszeugen zu erwirken; e) die unentgeltliche Beiziehung eines Dolmetschers zu verlangen, wenn der Angeklagte die Verhandlungssprache des Gerichts nicht versteht oder sich nicht darin ausdrücken kann.

0 results found

0 results found