Petrušić and Petrović v. Serbia
The European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter: the Court) is2. published the decision in the case in February 2023 Petrušić and Petrović against Serbia, no. 59134/16 and 10385/17.
It's a decisionpassed unanimouslyabout Board from the3 judgea.
The case referred to the applicants' complaints that theyviolated the right to access the court, because they were not awarded the costs of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court. The Court established that the legal representative of the applicants used provocative and offensive language during the proceedings before the Court, and rejected the petitions due to abuse of the right to file an individual petition. |
THE CIRCUMSTANCES CASES
The applicants filed constitutional appeals due to the excessive length of the criminal proceedings in which they were defendants.
The Constitutional Court accepted their constitutional appeals, found a violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time from Article 32, paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and awarded them compensation for non-material damages in the amount of 900 and 600 euros in dinar equivalents.
However, when it comes to the applicants' request for compensation for the costs of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court took the position that there are no conditions for determining the requested compensation in the sense of Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the Law on the Constitutional Court.
COMPLAINTS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT
The applicants submitted their applications to the Court on October 3, 2016.
The applicants complained in the sense of Article 6, Paragraph 1 of the Convention due to the violation of the right to access the court, as a component of the right to a fair trial, because they were not awarded the costs of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court.
DECISION OF THE COURT
After evaluating the presented evidence and allegations presented by the applicants and the defendant Republic of Serbia, the Court found that the legal representative of the applicants used provocative and offensive language during the proceedings before the Court, and the petitions were rejected as inadmissible in the sense of Article 35, para. 3 and 4 of the Convention.
The court recalled its position according to which it can be considered that there is an abuse of the right to petition if the applicant uses particularly harsh, offensive, threatening or provocative language in his correspondence, regardless of whether it is directed at the respondent government or the representative of the respondent.
Also, it is not enough for the applicant's language to be harsh, polemical or sarcastic, but it must cross "the line of normal, civil and legitimate criticism" to be considered offensive (seeX and other against Bulgaria, number 22457/16, Grand Chamber, paragraph 146, judgment of February 2, 2021).
In the specific case, the Court assessed that the legal representative of the applicants exceeded the limit of acceptable communication during the procedure, so it determined the abuse of the right to petition and rejected the complaints as inadmissible.