PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 48221/99) against the French Republic lodged with the European Court of Human Rights under former Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a French national, Mrs Marie-Thérèse Berger (“the applicant”), on 28 October 1998. The application was registered on 20 May 1999.

The French Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Dubrocard, Head of the Human Rights Section, Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained, in particular, of the unfairness of criminal proceedings before the Court of Cassation in which she had been a civil party seeking damages.

The application was allocated to the Third Section of the Court (Rule 52 § 1 of the Rules of Court). Within that Section, the Chamber that would consider the case (Article 27 § 1 of the Convention) was constituted as provided in Rule 26 § 1.

By a decision of 10 July 2001, the Chamber declared the application partly admissible.

On 1 November 2001 the Court changed the composition of its Sections (Rule 25 § 1). This case was assigned to the newly composed Second Section (Rule 52 § 1).

Both the applicant and the Government filed written observations on the merits of the case (Rule 59 § 1).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1932 and lives in Champagny-en-Vanoise (Savoie).

On 30 September 1991 she signed a notarial deed by which she entered into a leasing arrangement with a limited company called SOFEBAIL for the renovation and furnishment of a holiday centre. She intended to run the business as a sole trader. As early as the end of 1991 she complained that the company had failed to complete the renovation works stipulated in the contract.

A. The applicant's criminal complaint and application to join the proceedings as a civil party seeking damages

On 13 June 1994 the applicant lodged a criminal complaint against the company for fraud, theft and fraudulent breach of trust and sought leave to join the proceedings as a civil party seeking damages.

On 5 May 1997 the investigating judge discontinued the proceedings in an order worded as follows: “It appears, in fact, from the evidence given by the civil parties and the head of SOFEBAIL and from the documents produced by the parties that the leasing arrangement, the mechanism of which has been described as fraudulent by the civil party, does not fall within the ambit of the criminal law. The disputes between [the applicant] and SOFEBAIL are clearly matters governed by civil or commercial law and have, moreover, given rise to various proceedings of this type in the civil or commercial courts.”

On 7 May 1997 the applicant appealed against that order.

On 10 July 1997 the Indictment Division of the Colmar Court of Appeal upheld the order in question. It found that the applicant's complaints were “manifestly dilatory” and that some of her allegations were “contradictory”, “purely gratuitous” or “entirely unsupported”.

On 11 July 1997 the applicant appealed to the Court of Cassation. Her appeal was heard on 24 September 1998. She was represented by counsel. Both parts of the reporting judge's report (the first containing a statement of the facts, the procedure and the grounds of appeal and the second a legal analysis of the case and an opinion on the merits of the appeal) had been sent to the advocate-general prior to the hearing. However, the applicant had not been sent a copy of both parts of the reporting judge's report. In a judgment of the same date the Court of Cassation declared the appeal inadmissible on the following grounds: “The Court of Cassation is satisfied from the wording of the judgment appealed against that, in upholding the order discontinuing the proceedings, the Indictment Division, after examining all the facts alleged by the appellant and addressing the main arguments in her memorial, stated the reasons for its decision that there was insufficient evidence that anyone had committed the alleged offences of fraudulent breach of trust and fraud or any other offence. None of the grounds of appeal, which amount to contesting the validity of the judges' findings of fact and of law, corresponds to any of the situations in which a civil party may appeal to the Court of Cassation, under Article 575 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against a judgment of an indictment division in the absence of an appeal by the prosecution ...” ...
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e1
001-60806_a11_em1
CODE
DIRECT
48221/99
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-60806_a11_e2
001-60806_a11_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
French Republic
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e3
001-60806_a11_em3
ORG
NO_MASK
European Court of Human Rights
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-60806_a11_e4
001-60806_a11_em4
DEM
NO_MASK
French
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-60806_a11_e5
001-60806_a11_em5
PERSON
DIRECT
Mrs Marie-Thérèse Berger
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e6
001-60806_a11_em6
DATETIME
QUASI
28 October 1998
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e7
001-60806_a11_em7
DATETIME
QUASI
20 May 1999
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-60806_a11_e2
001-60806_a11_em8
ORG
NO_MASK
001-60806_a11_em2
French Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e8
001-60806_a11_em9
PERSON
QUASI
Mrs M. Dubrocard
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e9
001-60806_a11_em10
ORG
NO_MASK
Human Rights Section
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e10
001-60806_a11_em11
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e11
001-60806_a11_em12
DATETIME
QUASI
10 July 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e12
001-60806_a11_em13
DATETIME
QUASI
1 November 2001
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e13
001-60806_a11_em14
DATETIME
QUASI
1932
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e14
001-60806_a11_em15
LOC
QUASI
Champagny-en-Vanoise
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e15
001-60806_a11_em16
LOC
QUASI
Savoie
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e16
001-60806_a11_em17
DATETIME
QUASI
30 September 1991
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e17
001-60806_a11_em18
ORG
QUASI
SOFEBAIL
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e18
001-60806_a11_em19
DATETIME
NO_MASK
end of 1991
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e19
001-60806_a11_em20
DATETIME
QUASI
13 June 1994
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-60806_a11_e20
001-60806_a11_em21
MISC
QUASI
fraud, theft and fraudulent breach of trust
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e21
001-60806_a11_em22
DATETIME
QUASI
5 May 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e17
001-60806_a11_em23
ORG
QUASI
SOFEBAIL
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e17
001-60806_a11_em24
ORG
QUASI
SOFEBAIL
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e22
001-60806_a11_em25
DATETIME
QUASI
7 May 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e23
001-60806_a11_em26
DATETIME
QUASI
10 July 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e24
001-60806_a11_em27
ORG
NO_MASK
Indictment Division of the Colmar Court of Appeal
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e25
001-60806_a11_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
11 July 1997
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e10
001-60806_a11_em29
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e26
001-60806_a11_em30
DATETIME
QUASI
24 September 1998
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e10
001-60806_a11_em31
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e10
001-60806_a11_em32
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e27
001-60806_a11_em33
ORG
NO_MASK
Indictment Division
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-60806_a11_e10
001-60806_a11_em34
ORG
NO_MASK
Court of Cassation
Thérèse Berger
FRA
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Thérèse Berger