Friedrich Kremzow v Republik Österreich.

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• Celex Number: 61995CC0299
• ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:1997:58
• Date: 06 February 1997
• Court: Court of Justice (European Union)
• Procedure Type: Reference for a preliminary ruling
• Docket Number: C-299/95

61995C0299

Opinion of Mr Advocate General La Pergola delivered on 6 February 1997. - Friedrich Kremzow v Republik Österreich. - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Oberster Gerichtshof - Austria. - Article 164 of the EC Treaty - European Convention on Human Rights - Deprivation of liberty - Right to a fair trial - Effects of a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. - Case C-299/95.

European Court reports 1997 Page I-02629

Opinion of the Advocate-General

I - Introduction

1. In this case, the Court has been asked to rule whether the European Convention on Human Rights constitutes in its entirety an integral part of Community law and whether the Court itself therefore has jurisdiction to interpret all the provisions of the Convention in the context of a reference for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 177 of the EC Treaty.

II - Facts

2. The proceedings before the national court are concerned with a claim for compensation for the damage which Dr Kremzow considers he suffered on account of his unlawful detention by the Austrian authorities, since a judgment given by the Court of Human Rights on 21 September 1993 found that Dr Kremzow's right to defend himself within the meaning of Article 6(1) and (3)(c) of the European Convention on Human Rights (`the Convention') had been infringed. According to that judgment, the violation was committed by the Republic of Austria in so far as it failed to allow Dr Kremzow, who was charged with murder and found guilty at first instance, to defend himself personally on appeal.

3. According to the appellant, he is entitled to compensation under Article 5(5) of the Convention because he was unlawfully deprived of his liberty. The national court points out in this connection that on 3 April 1995 the Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court) dismissed an application made by Dr Kremzow for a reduction in the sentence following the aforementioned judgment of the Strasbourg court.

At the stage reached in the litigation pending before the national court, it is therefore necessary to determine the effects of the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights on Austrian procedural and administrative rules. The national court considers this to be necessary in order to determine whether the appellant in the main proceedings is entitled to compensation in this specific case.

4. In order to resolve that problem, the Oberster Gerichtshof therefore thought fit to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:

`A. Are all or at least the substantive-law provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") - including the provisions of Articles 5, 6 and 53 of the Convention which are relevant to the proceedings before the Oberster Gerichtshof - part of Community law (Article 164 of the EEC Treaty), with the result that the Court of Justice of the European Communities may give a preliminary ruling on their interpretation pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 177 of the EEC Treaty?

B. The following further questions are referred to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a preliminary ruling only in...