EIT:ltä kaksi asianajajan ja päämiehen välisen yhteydenpidon luottamuksellisuutta koskevaa ratkaisua – 8 artiklaa oli rikottu
16.11.2021 | OikeusuutisetVasil Vasilev v. Bulgaria (application no. 7610/15)
The applicant, Vasil Tonchev Vasilev, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1958 and lives in Sofia. He is a lawyer.
The case concerns the interception, recording and transcription of a telephone conversation in 2010 between the applicant and one of his clients, a former Minister of Defence, who was being covertly monitored in connection with a criminal case. Mr Vasilev complained to the prosecuting authorities and brought a claim for damages, arguing that the conversation was covered by lawyer-client privilege and that its recording and transcript should have been destroyed. Both actions were to no avail.
Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private, family life and the home) of the European Convention on Human Rights, Mr Vasilev complains that the covert recording and transcription of the telephone conversation with his client was unlawful and unnecessary. He argues in particular that Bulgarian law did not have sufficiently clear rules on the destruction of accidentally intercepted lawyer-client communications.
Also relying on Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention, he complains that the proceedings for damages were classified because the evidence admitted had been obtained via secret surveillance. The public was therefore excluded from hearings in the case and the ensuing judgments were not delivered publicly.
- Violation of Article 8
- Violation of Article 6 § 1 owing to the exclusion of the public from the hearings in proceedings for damages brought by the applicant
- Violation of Article 6 § 1 owing to the absence of publicity of the judgments given in the proceedings for damages brought by the applicant
Särgava v. Estonia (no. 698/19)
The applicant, Viktor Särgava, is an Estonian national who was born in 1982 and lives in Tallinn. He is a lawyer.
The case concerns legislation on lawyer-client confidentiality.
Mr Särgava was suspected of belonging to a criminal organisation and in 2018 the authorities authorised a search of his law firm, home and car. In the context of the criminal proceedings brought against him he unsuccessfully argued that the seizure of his laptop and mobile phone during the searches was unlawful. The proceedings against him are still ongoing.
Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private, family life and the home) of the Convention, the applicant submits that the information contained on his laptop and telephone was covered by legal professional privilege, and that its seizure was therefore unlawful.
- Violation of Article 8