CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 21 septembre 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 } .s65B66A85 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s85F2E5C5 { width:30.44pt; display:inline-block } .sBDAE81C4 { width:27.67pt; display:inline-block } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .s90A93616 { width:27.66pt; display:inline-block } .sC7C396CD { width:24.89pt; display:inline-block } .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 September 1994 Fayed v. United Kingdom - 17101/90 Judgment 21.9.1994 Article 6 Article 6-1 Access to court Investigation into the affairs of a public company by independent inspectors appointed by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, and publication by the Secretary of State of the Inspectors' report: no violation [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.] I.   GOVERNMENT'S PRELIMINARY OBJECTION (NON-EXHAUSTION OF DOMESTIC REMEDIES) Neither judicial review of the Inspectors' and the Secretary of State's actions nor libel actions against a third party would have provided a remedy against the responsible authorities for determination of the truth of damaging statements about the applicants in the Inspectors' report. Conclusion : objection dismissed (unanimously). II.   ARTICLE 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION A.   Investigation by the Inspectors Applicability: Inspectors did not adjudicate, either in form or in substance — their functions were essentially investigative — their inquiry did not "determine" the applicants' civil right to a good reputation, nor was its result directly decisive for that right — Article 6 § 1 (under its "civil" head) not applicable. B.   Proceedings to contest Inspectors' findings 1.   Applicability Not necessary to settle the issue in the circumstances. 2.   Compliance Article 6 § 1 secures "right to a court", of which right of access is an aspect — right of access is not absolute but may be subject to implied limitations — whilst national authorities enjoy a certain margin of appreciation, limitations applied must not impair the very essence of the right, must pursue a legitimate aim and must respect the principle of proportionality. Limitation on applicants' ability to take legal proceedings, whether by way of a defamation action or by way of judicial review, to challenge findings and conclusions in the Inspectors' report which were damaging to their reputations — Court had regard in particular to national authorities' responsibility to regulate conduct of the affairs of public companies and to the safeguards that existed in relation to the impugned investigation — limitation not found to involve an unjustified denial of applicants' "right to a court". C.   Libel proceedings against others Complaint not pursued. D.   Conclusion : no violation (unanimously). III.   ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION Applicants' effective withdrawal of this complaint. Conclusion : not necessary to examine (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