2025

DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.31178/AUBD/2025.12

Abstract: The applicability of Article 6 of the Convention, in its civil aspect, when the victim brings a civil claim in criminal proceedings, may seem like a simple matter; however, the case law of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights demonstrates otherwise. In this paper, I focus primarily on the changes brought about by the Grand Chamber’s judgment in the case of Fabbri and Others v. San Marino.

Essentially, applications to the Court on this issue can be divided into three categories. First, when criminal proceedings have been discontinued for reasons that are not arbitrary or manifestly unreasonable, the applicant must subsequently bring an action before the civil courts. Otherwise, the applicant cannot allege a violation of Article 6 of the Convention. Second, where criminal proceedings were discontinued due to a systemic deficiency in the national legal framework, a violation of Article 6 may be found only if the applicant did not contribute to this outcome through negligence or passive conduct. If the applicant did not act diligently to seek compensation within the criminal proceedings, he or she must subsequently bring a civil action as provided for by national law. Third, if the criminal proceedings were interrupted due to a systemic failure of the national legal system, and the applicant diligently pursued that course of action, Article 6 of the Convention may have been violated.

This system ensures a predictable and reasonable approach to the applicability of Article 6 of the Convention, in its civil aspect, when the victim brings a civil action in criminal proceedings.

Keywords: right of access to a court, European Court of Human Rights, applicability, civil party, criminal proceedings, civil action.