Background
Olga Patsaka-Christidou, a former court clerk, challenged the 2010 calculation of her civil-service pension, alleging that she had been placed in the wrong salary bracket. She filed an objection with Greece’s Pension Assessment Review Committee in 2010. The Committee did not issue a decision.
In 2013, Greece abolished the Committee. The pension authority wrote to the applicant, identifying her objection and stating that it was deemed tacitly refused and that she could appeal to the Court of Audit within one year. She appealed within that period. In 2024, however, the Court of Audit dismissed the appeal as late, holding that the objection had already been tacitly refused after three months of administrative inaction in 2010 and was therefore not “pending” when the Committee was abolished.
The Court’s Holding
The European Court of Human Rights unanimously held that Greece violated Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Although the Court of Audit’s interpretation pursued the legitimate aim of the proper administration of justice, its application deprived the applicant of the very essence of her right of access to a court.
The Strasbourg Court found it was not unreasonable for the applicant to await an express decision, since the Committee could decide objections long after the three-month period used to establish a tacit refusal. The 2013 official letter gave her a specific, apparently applicable one-year appeal period. Treating her objection as no longer pending was not reasonably foreseeable and imposed an undue burden after the unexpected abolition of the body competent to decide her claim. The Court declined to examine the separate Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 complaint and awarded EUR 6,000 for non-pecuniary damage.
Key Takeaways
- A procedural time limit cannot be applied so rigidly that it eliminates practical access to a court.
- Administrative inaction and a deemed refusal do not necessarily make an unresolved objection non-pending.
- Authorities’ specific information about an available remedy and deadline must receive meaningful weight.
Why It Matters
The judgment limits the use of formalistic procedural interpretations where an administrative restructuring leaves claimants without a merits decision. It is particularly relevant where a claimant reasonably relies on official notice describing a newly created or transitional appeal route.
The Court also rejected Greece’s non-exhaustion objection because established Court of Audit case-law gave the applicant no realistic prospect of a different outcome from her pending appeal on points of law.