Belgian Constitutional Court strengthens access to justice
04/03/2022

The Belgian Constitutional Court ruled that the right of access to justice requires the writ of service of a judgment to state the right to appeal, the time limit for bringing such an appeal, and the name and address of the appeal court.

We assess the judgment and its impact below.

Service of a judgment

Service refers to the delivery of an original or a copy of an act of justice, including judicial decisions, by bailiff’s writ.

A judgment can only be enforced after it has been served. The purpose of such service is, on the one hand, to ensure that the losing party is made aware of the judgment. On the other hand, the service initiates the time limits for bringing an appeal.

Principle since 1967

Since its adoption in 1967, the Judicial Code specifies the content of the writ of service. The mandatory entries are listed in Article 43 of the Judicial Code.

However, Article 43 contains no obligation to include in the writ of service the right of appeal, the time limit for bringing an appeal, and the name and address of the appeal court.

Access to justice

Every legal subject is generally entitled to a right of access to justice, which is an aspect of the right to a fair trial, and means any person can use the judicial system to resolve legal problems and to defend themselves and their interests.

This right may be subject to conditions of admissibility. However, it is infringed if the arrangement constitutes any kind of barrier preventing the individual from having his or her dispute decided by the competent court.

Notifications

Service by bailiff's writ is the general rule for the communication of acts of justice. Nevertheless, the legislature has provided an exception to this rule, which is notification by court letter.

Notification is the delivery of an act of justice in original or in copy, through the postal services, or by electronic mail.

As opposed to service by bailiff's writ, the Judicial Code requires that a notice by court letter indicates the right of appeal, the time limit for bringing an appeal, and the name and address of the appeal court.

Discrimination (the judgment of 10 February 2022)

Although the Court has clarified that the legislature was allowed to set, without discrimination, additional requirements for notification, the question considered here was whether the absence of these requirements in the general rule of service (through a bailiff's writ) might discriminately impede access to justice.

To ensure the right of access to justice, it is important to inform the litigant as explicitly as possible of his/her rights regarding appeal and the relevant time limits.

According to the Court, the indication of remedies is an essential element of the general principle of due process and the right of access to justice.

The Court has therefore considered that the lack of communication about the right to appeal, the time limit for bringing an appeal, and the name and address of the appeal court in the service of a bailiff’s writ is discriminatory.

Result

The Court has found that Article 43 of the Judicial Code violates Articles 10 and 11 of the Constitution, read in conjunction with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the general principles governing access to justice.

As a result, writs of service will have to state the right to appeal, the time limit for bringing an appeal, and the name and address of the appeal court.

The Court has not set out a transition period: writs of service that do not contain the required information are valid until the legislature intervenes, and in any case until 31 December 2022.

 

Related : ALTIUS ( Mr. Alexander Hansebout ,  Ms. Charlotte Vandeurzen )

[+ http://www.alitus.com]

Mr. Alexander Hansebout Mr. Alexander Hansebout
Partner
[email protected]
Ms. Charlotte Vandeurzen Ms. Charlotte Vandeurzen
Associate
[email protected]

Click here to see the ad(s)
All articles Constitutional law

Lastest articles Constitutional law

"Geblokstaarte” dieren: verbod deelname aan tentoonstellingen, keuringen of wedstrijden niet on...
28/10/2019

Het Grondwettelijk Hof heeft in een arrest van 24 oktober 2019 uitspraak gedaan over het verbod om met zogenaamde “g...

Read more

Taal in gerechtszaken is en blijft van openbare orde!
30/09/2019

Het Grondwettelijk Hof heeft in een belangwekkend arrest nr. 120/2019 van 19 september 2019 artikel 5 ...

Taal in gerechtszaken is en blijft van openbare orde! Read more

Het Grondwettelijk Hof sanctioneert de schending van inspraakmogelijkheden van burgers inzake nat...
04/10/2016

Op 28 april 2016, heeft het Grondwettelijk Hof uitspraak gedaan (arrest nr. 57/2016) over de beroepen tot nietigverklaring...

Read more

Progress on the Unitary Patent
27/08/2015

On 10 July 2015, the Preparatory Committee (which handles all the subsidiary issues arising from the creation of the Unifi...

Read more

Lastest articles by Mr. Alexander Hansebout

Conservatory measures despite the freezing of assets under EU sanctions?
15/12/2021

On 11 November 2021, the CJEU (C-340/20) ruled that the freezing of assets and economic resources under the EU restrictive...

Read more

The Belgian Class Action: Whom to be Wary of?
18/01/2021

In 2014 Belgium introduced a limited form of class action into its legal system and will now have to adjust it further to ...

Read more

The ICC 2021 arbitration rules: 7 noteworthy changes
29/12/2020

The International Court of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce (‘ICC’) has issued a revised v...

Read more

Anti-Vulture Legislation: the Belgian Attempt – or How Not to Do It
03/12/2020

With up to 6 governments defaulting on their bonds this year, sovereign debt restructuring is topical. In this context so-...

Read more

Lastest articles by Ms. Charlotte Vandeurzen

No automatic liability for directors who do not ring the alarm bell
20/12/2021

On 16 September 2021, the Antwerp Court of Appeal ruled on the liability of the directors of a company that did not respec...

Read more

LexGO Network