Bulgaria / Supreme Cassation Court of the Republic of Bulgaria / Private civil case 2253/2018

Cassation appellant: Mr E.D.M. seeking compensation for unlawful actions by investigative police
Policy area
Justice, freedom and security
Deciding body type
National Court/Tribunal
Deciding body
Supreme Cassation Court of the Republic of Bulgaria
Type
Decision
Decision date
05/07/2018
ECLI (European case law identifier)
ECLI:BG:SC001:2018:20180502253.001
  • Bulgaria / Supreme Cassation Court of the Republic of Bulgaria / Private civil case 2253/2018

    Key facts of the case:

    As a result of a ruling by the lower appellate and the lowest instance, terminating his civil case in question, a Mr E.D.M. submitted a cassation appeal asking whether Art. 13 of the ECHR could open the possibility for compensation for damage arising from actions of the authorities and whether the provision takes precedence before national law. The termination of the case was also claimed wrongful due to violation of Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Art. 47 of the Charter. The case concerned a claim for compensation against an investigative police officer for his allegedly unlawful failure to recuse himself from a criminal case. The lowest court found that, due to the functional immunity of police, the claim against the officer is procedurally inadmissible. The appellate court confirmed the stance of the lower court. The Supreme Cassation Court recalled that, in compliance with Art. 13 of the ECHR, Bulgarian law provides for a mechanism to compensate damage arising from actions of authorities, the Liability of State and Municipalities for Damage Act (Закон за отговорността на държавата и общините за вреди). The functional immunity of officers themselves does not preclude the victims of such actions from receiving due process under that Act. In this sense, the appellant’s argument for violation of Art. 47 of the Charter is not relevant either, as he has an effective remedy, a claim under the special Act. The officer himself could only be held liable if the damaging act was done intentionally, as a result of a crime or not in relation with the officer’s official duties.

    Key legal question raised by the Court:

    Could, under the effective remedy provisions of the ECHR and the Charter, an officer be held liable for his/her unlawful actions having caused damage to a citizen?

    Outcome of the case:

    The Supreme Cassation Court denied the cassation appeal of Mr E.D.M. and precluded the claim for damage, directed at a police officer for his allegedly unlawful actions.

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter

    „The question whether Art. 13 of the ECHR offers the possibility for compensation of damage arising from actions of the authorities and whether this norm takes precedence before Bulgarian law is decided upon in accordance with established case law. The court has found that, in accordance with the requirements of Art. 13 of the Convention, Bulgarian law does offer a remedy for protection against violations by representatives of state authorities – the Liability of State and Municipalities for Damage Act (Закон за отговорността на държавата и общините за вреди). The proclaimed functional immunity does not deprive the victims of actions by police officers in relation to their official duties from options to protect their rights via due process under the Act, as long as Art. 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria (Конституция на Република България) stipulates that the state is responsible for damage, caused by unlawful acts or action of its bodies or officers, and according to Art. 216, para. 2 of the Ministry of the Interior Act (Закон за Министерството на вътрешните работи) the state shall compensate the person having sustained damage for all material and non-material damage according to the general civil law.

    Based on the above, the court cannot share either the arguments for flagrant wrongfulness of the impugned ruling, which is given in accordance with established case law applying Art. 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Art. 47 of the Charter – the appellant does have a way to protect his rights by a claim under the Liability of State and Municipalities for Damage Act.”

  • Paragraphs referring to EU Charter (original language)

    „Въпросът предвижда ли чл. 13 от Европейската конвенция за защита правата на човека и основните свободи възможност за обезщетение за вреди от действията на представителите на официалните власти и следва ли тази норма на международното право да се прилага с предимство пред българското право е разрешен в съответствие с установената съдебна практика. Съдът е съобразил, че в съответствие с изискванията на чл. 13 от Европейската конвенция за защита правата на човека и основните свободи, българското законодателство предвижда вътрешноправно средство за защита от нарушения, извършени от лица, действащи в качеството си на представители на официалните власти - Закон за отговорността на държавата и общините за вреди (ЗОДОВ). Прогласеният функционален имунитет не лишава пострадалите от действията на служителите на МВР, извършени по повод изпълнение на служебните им задължения, от възможност да защитят правата си чрез справедлив съдебен процес по реда на ЗОДОВ, доколкото в чл. 7 от Конституцията на Република България е предвидено, че държавата отговаря за вреди, причинени от незаконни актове или действия на нейни органи и длъжностни лица, а съгласно чл. 216, ал. 2 ЗМВР, държавата е длъжна да обезщети увредения за всички имуществени и неимуществени вреди съобразно общите правила на гражданското право.

    Предвид изложеното, неоснователни са и доводите за очевидна неправилност на обжалваното определение, постановено в съответствие с установената съдебна практика по приложението на чл. 6 и чл. 13 от Европейската конвенция за защита правата на човека и основните свободи и чл. 47 от Хартата на основаните права на Европейския съюз - жалбоподателят разполага с уреден в закона път за защита на правата си чрез иск за вреди по реда на ЗОДОВ.”