0
Off

NOTIFICATION IN PORTUGUESE LANGUAGE | DEFENDANT RESIDING ABROAD | TRANSLATION | RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL

 

Constitutional Court, judgment no. 632/99, 17.11.1999

 

JURISDICTION: Constitutional

CASE: 166/99

SUBJECT: Constitutional appeal

RAPPORTEUR: Artur Maurício

RULING: Rejects the appeal, based on the understanding that Articles 244 and 495(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure are not in breach of the Constitution by not requiring that the notification by post of a foreign defendant residing abroad be translated into the language of the state of residence or into one of the working languages of the 1965 Hague Convention.

DOMESTIC LAW:

Portuguese Constitution (Articles 13, 20)

Law no. 28/82, of 15 November 1982 [Article 70(1)(b)]

Code of Civil Procedure [Articles 139(1), 191(1)(d), 194, 195, 198, 228 and ff., 244, 484(1), 489, 495(1)(d)]

Decree-Law no. 210/71, of 18 May 1971

Constitutional Court, judgment no. 147/92, 08.04.1992

Constitutional Court, judgment no. 208/93, 16.03.1993

Constitutional Court, judgment no. 223/95, 25.04.1995

Constitutional Court, judgment no. 352/98, 12.05.1998

INTERNATIONAL LAW:

Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, 1965 [Article 10(a)]

European Convention on Human Rights (Article 6)

FOREIGN LAW: n.a.

KEYWORDS: Notification in Portuguese language; defendant residing abroad; translation; right to a fair trial; working languages of the Hague Convention; Swedish language; Kingdom of Sweden; Swedish company; language of the defendant’s state of residence; principle of equality; principle of access to law; right to effective judicial protection; right to access the courts; parity between the parties; differences resulting from the “nature of things”; areas where absolute parity is unachievable; sovereignty rights of the Portuguese state; “difference”; “burden” to express oneself in a language other than one’s own; litigation between foreign citizens and Portuguese citizens; use of a foreign language through translation; “equality of arms” between the parties; value of the use of Portuguese language in judicial acts; principle of fairness; rights of defence

COMMENTS: Coming soon.

REFERENCES IN THE LITERATURE:

MIRANDA, Jorge, e MEDEIROS, Rui, Constituição Portuguesa Anotada [Annotation to the Portuguese Constitution], tomo I, 2.ª ed., Coimbra, Wolters Kluwer/Coimbra Editora, 2010.

 

Download the ruling.

 

 

 

 

Share this comment
Posted inNOTIFICATION IN PORTUGUESE LANGUAGE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL DEFENDANT RESIDING ABROAD TRANSLATION
Tags“Difference” “Burden” to Express Oneself in a Language Other Than One's Own “Equality of Arms” Between the Parties Notification in Portuguese Language Differences Resulting From the “Nature of Things” Right to Effective Judicial Protection Right to a Fair Trial Right to Access the Courts Rights of Defence Sovereignty Rights of the Portuguese State Swedish Company Language of the Defendant's State Of Residence Swedish Language Working Languages of the Hague Convention Litigation Between Foreign Citizens and Portuguese Citizens Parity Between the Parties Principle of Fairness Equality Principle Principle of Access to Law Kingdom of Sweden Defendant Residing Abroad Translation Use of a Foreign Language Through Translation Value of the Use of Portuguese Language in Judicial Acts Areas Where Absolute Parity is Unachievable