European Court of Human Rights – Chapman v. Belgium

The case originated from an employment dispute instituted before Belgian courts against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) by Mr Chapman.

The Bruxelles Employment Tribunal dismissed the case, finding that the respondent organization was immune from national jurisdiction. The Employment Appeals Tribunal confirmed such conclusion. As a result, Mr Chapman filed an application to the European Court of Human Rights, claiming that Belgium had infringed his right to a judicial remedy enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Confirming its traditional understanding, the European Court held that the Convention does not prevent States from establishing international organizations and granting immunity to the them. However, international organizations’ immunity is compatible with the Convention to the extent that the resulting limitation to the individual right of access to justice is proportionate. In this regard, the Court stressed that “bearing in mind the legitimate aim of immunities of international organisations , the test of proportionality cannot be applied in such a way as to compel an international organization to submit itself to national litigation in relation to employment conditions prescribed under national labour law. To read Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and its guarantee of access to court as necessarily requiring the organization to accept the jurisdiction of national courts, at least in respect of the conditions of employment of its staff, would, in the Court’s view, thwart the proper functioning of international organisations”.

In the instant case, the Court found that NATO’s internal system of justice offers adequate and appropriate means of redress. Therefore, given the existence of alternative modes of dispute settlement, the Court concluded that the respondent State did not violate its obligations under Article 6.