CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 13 juin 1994

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. June 1994 Barberà, Messegué and Jabardo v. Spain (just satisfaction) - 10588/83, 10590/83 and 10589/83 Judgment 13.6.1994 Article 41 Costs and expenses Non-pecuniary damage Pecuniary damage Claim for just satisfaction by applicants whom the Court, in an earlier judgment, had held to be victims of a violation of Article   6   § 1 of the Convention [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.] A.   DAMAGE Causal connection: applicants were kept in prison as a direct consequence of trial found by the Court to be in violation of Article   6   § 1 -   real loss of opportunity to defend themselves and to secure a more favourable outcome. Restitutio in integrum: could not be afforded by subsequent release and acquittal of applicants. Possibility existed of obtaining compensation under Spanish law, but Court not bound to stay proceedings - if applicants were required to exhaust remedies a third time, the total length of proceedings would not be consistent with an effective protection of human rights. Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage calling for compensation to be assessed on an equitable basis. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sums to the applicants for damage (thirteen votes to three). B.   COSTS AND EXPENSES Claim allowed in part. Conclusion : respondent State to pay specified sum to the applicants for costs and expenses (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