CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 27 septembre 2011

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; 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. 144 August-September 2011 Youssef v. the Netherlands (dec.) - 11936/08 Decision 27.9.2011 [Section III] Article 41 Costs and expenses Costs on striking out of application – Recovery of translation costs   Facts – The applicants were Syrian nationals who had lodged various complaints with the European Court after unsuccessfully applying for asylum in the Netherlands. The Government later informed the Court that the situation had been reviewed and the applicants granted residence permits. The latter’s application to the Court was therefore struck out of the list under Article   37, except for a complaint under Article   6 which was declared inadmissible. The question then arose as to whether the applicants were entitled to an award under Rule   43 §   4 of the Rules of Court* in respect of costs incurred in translating their submissions to the Court from Dutch into English, one of the Court’s two official languages. Law – Rule   43 §   4 of the Rules of Court: Under the Rules of Court, prior to notice of an application being given to a Government applicants could lodge their submissions in any of the official languages of the Contracting Parties. Even though submissions in English or French of good linguistic quality certainly assisted the Court in its work, translation costs made at that stage of the proceedings could not be said to have been “necessarily incurred”. As regards the translation of submissions after notice of the application had been given, the position was that, while translations had evidently to be of good quality, there was no requirement that they be certified or produced by a sworn translator. The applicants were therefore awarded costs relating to the translation of the submissions lodged after notice of the application was given to the Government except in so far as they related to the inadmissible Article   6 complaint. *   Rule   43 §   4 provides: “When an application has been struck out, the costs shall be at the discretion of the Court. ...”.   © 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