The case concerned the interception by a police officer of papers that a lawyer (Mr Laurent) had handed over to his clients, who were under police escort, in the lobby of a court building.
The Court found that the interception and opening of Mr Laurent’s correspondence with his clients, in his capacity as a lawyer, had not corresponded to a pressing social need and had therefore not been necessary in a democratic society within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention.
The Court specified that a folded sheet of paper on which a lawyer has written a message before handing it over to his clients was protected correspondence within the meaning of Article 8.
It emphasised that the content of the documents intercepted by the police officer was immaterial given that, whatever its purpose, correspondence between lawyers and their clients concerned matters of a private and confidential character. In the present case, Mr Laurent, in his capacity as a lawyer, had written and handed over the papers in question to his clients in full view of the senior escorting officer, without attempting to conceal his actions. In the absence of any suspicion of an unlawful act, the interception of the documents could not be justified.
Judgement of the ECHR no. 28798/13 of May 24, 2018
Source: press release of the ECHR no. 184 (2018) of May 24, 2018
