FRIDA, LLC v. UKRAINE - 24003/07 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Fifth Section)) [2016] ECHR 1086 (08 December 2016)

FRIDA, LLC v. UKRAINE - 24003/07 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Fifth Section)) [2016] ECHR 1086 (08 December 2016)

The domestic courts showed excessive formalism by disregarding the applicant company's application for an extension of time included in the cover letter, thereby disproportionately restricting the applicant company's right to have its case reviewed on points of law, resulting in a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

Citation
[2016] ECHR 1086
Parties
Applicant: Frida, LLC; Respondent: Ukraine
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
08 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Final Judgment
Outcome
Violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards access to court; no need to examine separately the complaint regarding adversarial proceedings and equality of arms; remainder of application inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Access to Court, Adversarial Proceedings, Equality of Arms
Human Rights Law Civil Procedure Access to Court Adversarial Proceedings Equality of Arms

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frida, LLC

Applicant

Ukraine

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application Under Article 34 of the European Convention on Human Rights / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant company's right of access to court was unduly restricted
  2. 2 Whether the principles of adversarial proceedings and equality of arms were respected

Ratio Decidendi

The domestic courts showed excessive formalism by disregarding the applicant company's application for an extension of time included in the cover letter, thereby disproportionately restricting the applicant company's right to have its case reviewed on points of law, resulting in a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards access to court; no need to examine separately the complaint regarding adversarial proceedings and equality of arms; remainder of application inadmissible.

Orders

  • Respondent State to pay applicant company EUR 2,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage within three months, converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.
  • Respondent State to pay applicant company EUR 1,000 in respect of costs and expenses within three months, converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement.