EGMR zur Richterbefangenheit (Vater-Rechter/der Sohn-Referendar)
Ist ein Richter, dessen Kind als Referendar in der Kanzlei einer der Parteien eingestellt ist, in der Sache entscheiden oder ist er befangen? Nach der Rechtsprechung der deutschen Gerichte wäre in dem Fall die Befangenheit nicht gegeben. Der EGMR entschied jedoch anders.
The applicant, Milica Ramljak, is a Croatian national who was born in 1962 and lives in Sinj (Croatia). She claimed that, in the course of legal proceedings concerning a will, the tribunal considering her case had not been impartial. The proceedings in question consisted of an appeal before a three-judge panel of the Civil Division of the Split County Court. The judge presiding over the panel was the father of a trainee lawyer, who was employed by the law firm representing the party opposing Ms Ramljak in the proceedings. The judges found against Ms Ramljak, and her further appeals to both the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court were both rejected.
Relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights, Ms Ramljak complained that her case had not been considered by an independent and impartial tribunal, due to the existence of close family ties between the judge ruling on her case and an employee of the law office representing her opponent. Violation of Article 6 § 1 Just satisfaction: 3,500 euros (EUR) (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 850 (costs and expenses)