Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF PHAM HOANG AGAINST FRANCE

Doc ref: 13191/87 • ECHR ID: 001-55565

Document date: September 21, 1993

Inbound citations: 2
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF PHAM HOANG AGAINST FRANCE

Doc ref: 13191/87 • ECHR ID: 001-55565

Document date: September 21, 1993

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54

(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the

Convention"),

Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human

Rights in the case of Pham Hoang against France delivered on

25 September 1992 and transmitted the same day to the Committee

of Ministers;

Recalling that the case originated in an application against

France lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on

20 August 1987 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by

Mr Tuan Tran Pham Hoang, a French national, who complained that

he had been convicted for a customs offence on the basis of

statutory presumptions of guilt which were contrary to

Article 6, paragraphs 1 and 2 (art. 6-1, art. 6-2), of the

Convention and that he had not been assisted by a lawyer during

the hearing of his appeal on points of law;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the

Commission on 7 June 1991;

Whereas in its judgment of 25 September 1992 the Court

unanimously:

- rejected the Government's preliminary objection;

- held that there had been no breach of Article 6,

paragraphs 1 and 2 (art. 6-1, art. 6-2);

- held that there had been a breach of Article 6,

paragraph 3.c (art. 6-3-c);

- held that this finding of a breach constituted sufficient

just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained;

- held that the respondent State was to pay the applicant,

within three months, 30 000 French francs in respect of costs and

expenses;

- dismissed the remainder of the claim for just

satisfaction;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of

Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of

the Convention;

Having invited the Government of France to inform it of the

measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of

25 September 1992, having regard to its obligation under

Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;

Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee

of Ministers, the Government of France gave the Committee

information about the measures taken in consequence of the

judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this

resolution;

Having satisfied itself that the Government of France has

paid the applicant, on 26 February 1993, the sum provided for in

the judgment of 25 September 1992,

Declares, after having taken note of the information

supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its

functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this

case.

Appendix to Resolution DH (93) 31

Information provided by the Government of France

during the examination of the Pham Hoang case

by the Committee of Ministers

Law No. 91-647 of 10 July 1991 on legal aid has changed the

legal aid system.

In pursuance of Section 10 of this law, legal aid

is granted to plaintiffs or defendants in contentious or

non-contentious proceedings before any court.

A Legal Aid Office has therefore been set up at each

tribunal de grande instance to decide on applications for legal

aid relating to proceedings before the administrative or criminal

courts of first and second instance. A Legal Aid Office has also

been set up at the Court of Cassation, the Conseil d'Etat and the

Refugee Appeals Board.

A practising or retired judge of the Court of Cassation is

in charge of that Court's Legal Aid Office. It is also staffed

by two members selected by the Court of Cassation, two counsels

at the Conseil d'Etat and Court of Cassation, one representative

of the Ministry for the Budget, one representative of the

Ministry for Social Affairs and one member appointed to represent

users' interests.

As a general rule, legal aid is granted where the applicant

has insufficient means and when his action does not appear

manifestly inadmissible and unfounded, although this last

condition does not apply to certain categories of persons

including persons accused of crimes, offences, misdemeanours or

summary offences and convicted persons.

Sub-section 3 of Section 7 of the law provides that, in

respect of cassation, applications for legal aid shall be turned

down where no serious ground of appeal on points of law can be

found to exist, that is where an appeal is manifestly destined

to fail. This provision applies to all applicants to the Court

of Cassation.

Appeals may be made against Legal Aid Offices' decisions;

such appeals in cassation cases are referred to the President of

the Court of Cassation, whose ruling is issued in an order not

subject to appeal.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant