KLASS AND OTHERS v. GERMANY JUGDMENT

28

by the Government, the individual concerned, once he has been notified of
such discontinuance, has at his disposal several legal remedies against the
possible infringements of his rights; these remedies would satisfy the
requirements of Article 6 (art. 6) (see paragraphs 24 and 71 above).
The Court accordingly concludes that, even if it is applicable, Article 6
(art. 6) has not been violated.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT
1. holds unanimously that it has jurisdiction to rule on the question whether
the applicants can claim to be victims within the meaning of Article 25
(art. 25) of the Convention;
2. holds unanimously that the applicants can claim to be victims within the
meaning of the aforesaid Article (art. 25);
3. holds unanimously that there has been no breach of Article 8, Article 13
or Article 6 (art. 8, art. 13, art. 6) of the Convention.
Done in French and English, both texts being authentic, at the Human
Rights Building, Strasbourg, this sixth day of September, nineteen hundred
and seventy-eight.
For the President
Gérard WIARDA
Vice-President
On behalf of the Registrar
Herbert PETZOLD
Deputy Registrar
The separate opinion of Judge PINHEIRO FARINHA is annexed to the
present judgment in accordance with Article 51 para. 2 (art. 51-2) of the
Convention and Rule 50 para. 2 of the Rules of Court.
G.W.
H.P.

Select target paragraph3