{"id":543,"date":"2016-01-31T09:47:32","date_gmt":"2016-01-31T08:47:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/?post_type=publication&#038;p=543"},"modified":"2025-09-10T11:19:49","modified_gmt":"2025-09-10T09:19:49","slug":"la-cour-de-justice-et-la-violation-du-delai-raisonnable-les-remedes-sont-ils-vraiment-conformes-aux-principes-de-la-cedh","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/publication\/la-cour-de-justice-et-la-violation-du-delai-raisonnable-les-remedes-sont-ils-vraiment-conformes-aux-principes-de-la-cedh\/","title":{"rendered":"La Cour de justice et la violation du d\u00e9lai raisonnable: les rem\u00e8des sont-ils vraiment conformes aux principes de la CEDH ?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Extrait<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">Le droit \u00e0 un proc\u00e8s \u00e9quitable dans un d\u00e9lai raisonnable est un pilier de la culture juridique occidentale qui trouve application dans le syst\u00e8me juridique de l\u2019Union europ\u00e9enne. En cas d\u2019une violation par un juge de l\u2019Union europ\u00e9enne, la Cour de justice, dans un premier temps, avait affirm\u00e9 (affaire\u00a0<em>Baustahlgewebe<\/em>) que, dans le cadre d\u2019un pourvoi, un rem\u00e8de effectif \u00e9tait une r\u00e9duction de l\u2019amende financi\u00e8re impos\u00e9e par la Commission. Dans un second temps, dans les affaires des sacs industriels en plastique (affaires\u00a0<em>Gascogne Sack Deutschland<\/em>,\u00a0<em>Kendrion<\/em>, et\u00a0<em>Groupe Gascogne<\/em>), la Cour, faisant un revirement de sa jurisprudence, a consid\u00e9r\u00e9 que le seul rem\u00e8de se trouve dans un recours en indemnit\u00e9 port\u00e9 devant le Tribunal.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">Cette solution, acceptable pour certaines raisons, pose toutefois plusieurs questions. En fait, dans la plupart des cas, le juge appel\u00e9 \u00e0 se prononcer sur la r\u00e9paration du dommage sera le m\u00eame organe juridictionnel, auteur de la violation. De l\u00e9gitimes doutes d\u2019impartialit\u00e9 objective subsistent.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">En outre, ainsi comme en t\u00e9moignent des affaires pendantes, il y a le risque d\u2019un conflit, plus ou moins ouvert, entre juridictions de l\u2019Union (Tribunal-Cour de justice), avec un potentiel pr\u00e9judice pour la cr\u00e9dibilit\u00e9, le prestige et la perception d\u2019impartialit\u00e9 de la Cour de justice dans son ensemble.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">Dans ce travail, apr\u00e8s une reconstruction de l\u2019\u00e9volution de la jurisprudence de la CJUE, on analyse la conformit\u00e9 du rem\u00e8de aux principes de la CEDH et \u00e0 la jurisprudence de la Cour europ\u00e9enne des droits de l\u2019homme.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\"><strong>Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">The right to a fair trial within a reasonable time is a pillar of western legal culture and it has been recognized as part of the EU legal order. In the event of a violation of that right by an EU Court, the ECJ, at first, said (<em>Baustahlgewebe<\/em>\u00a0case) that in the context of an appeal, an effective remedy was a reduction of the fine imposed by the Commission. Recently (<em>Gascogne Sack Deutschland, Kendrion, et Groupe Gascogne<\/em>\u00a0cases), ECJ ruled that the action for damages against the EU is the only remedy available for a breach of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">However, if this solution is acceptable for some reason, a number of problematic issues still stand. In fact, in most cases, the judge asked to rule on compensation for damage will be the same judicial body responsible for the breach. Therefore the doubts about a judge\u2019s impartiality are legitimate.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">Moreover, as demonstrated by some pending cases, there is the risk of conflict, more or less open, between the EU Courts (General Court-Court of Justice), with a potential harm to the credibility, the prestige and the perception of impartiality of the ECJ as a whole.<\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">So, in this work, after a reconstruction of the evolution of the case law of the ECJ, we analyze compliance of the remedy with the principles of the ECHR and the case law of the Strasbourg Court.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><em><a title=\"Maffeo.pdf\" href=\"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/01\/Geneva_JMWP_05-Maffeo.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Acc\u00e8s au texte &#8211; Access to full text<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","publication_tax":[47],"class_list":["post-543","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication_tax-working-paper"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/543\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":546,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/543\/revisions\/546"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication_tax","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication_tax?post=543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}