Philis v Greece 13 EHRR 741 1991: Right of access to a court was not absolute, but might be subject to limitations, since the right by its very nature called for regulation by the State. However, limitations ought not to restrict or reduce the access left to the individual in such a way as to impair the very essence of the right

European Court of Human Rights: applicant was a consultant engineer who complained that Greek law denied him the right to seek redress through the courts for non-payment of fees for design projects; only the Technical Chamber of Greece could do so. Compulsory surrogation: limitation must not affect essence of right (art 6(1)): right of access to a court was not absolute, but might be subject to limitations, since the right by its very nature called for regulation by the State. However, limitations ought not to restrict or reduce the access left to the individual in such a way as to impair the very essence of the right. Applicant was not able to institute proceedings directly and independently, to obtain payment of his fees. There was a violation of Art 6(1).

| Return to Topic Menu | Return to Main Menu |