3 C.L.R. 1987 ΑρπΙ 28 (PIKIS J ) IN THEMATTER OFARTICLE 146 OFTHECONSTITUTION THE INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIEDPUBLIC ACCOUNTANTSOFCYPRUSAND OTHERS, Applicants, THEREPUBLICOFCVPRUS.THROUGH THECENTRALBANKOFCYPRUS, Respondent (Case No 169/86) Recourse for annulment — Rightof audience — Applicationby person not made an interested party in the proceedings claiming a nght of audience — Pnnciplesapplicable Naturaljustice— Right to beheard 5 ConstitutionalLaw — Right to a public and fair heanng in the determination of one's civilnghtsand obligations— Constitution, Art 30 2 The minimum nghts associated with the exercise of the aforesaid nght — Constitution. Art 30 3 10 15 20 By the above recourse the Institute of Certified Public Accountants of Cyprus challenges the validity of the respondent's refusal to accept an applicationfor theissueof shares on theground thatsuch applicationwasnot submitted by an advocate Die fact of the recourse depends on judicial pronouncement on the question ofconstitutionalityofsection2
(1)oftheAdvocates L.aw(asamended by section 2 of Law 98/84) and inparticular, thatpart thatprecludes anyone other than an advocate from assuming any competence in relation to the preparation, revision, amendment of the memoradum and articles of association of a company or any other matter associated with or incidental thereto TheCyprus BarAssociation, which was notmadeaninterestedpartyinthe proceedings, filed thepresent application claiming a nght of audience inthe matter Neither the applicants nor the respondents raised objection to the application 445 Institute of Cert. Accts v. Republic
(1987)Held allowing theapplication
(1)Acknowledgment of the propnetyofthe application does not absolve the Court of the duty to decide whether it is warranted in law
(2)Natural justice requires that every party likely to be affected by the outcome of ajudicial cause ormattershould be afforded properopportunity 5 tobe heardandputhiscase before theCourt Thisrulefinds expression inArt 30 2 of the Constitution Moreover. Art 30 3 details the minimum nghts associated with the exercise of the fundamental nght safeguarded by the preceding paragraph Undoubtedly, section 2
(1)of the Advocates Law confers civilnghtstothemembersof theCyprus BarAssociation thattheyare 10 entitled todefend in proceedings before eveiy Courtof Law
(3)Aseries ofdecisions oftheSupremeCourtintheexercise ofitsrevisional jurisdiction ackowledge a nght to every party directly interested in the outcome ofacase totakepartintheproceedingsinsuch mannerasthejustice of the case requires 15
(4)The professional interests of the members of the Cyprus Bar Association, pnmanly financial, are directly at issue in the recourse Consequently the professional body representing them is legitimized inthe pursuitof thedefence of theirnghfc>
(5)Inthelightof the above theapplicationissustained 20 Applicationgranted Casesreferredto Vorkasand others ν TheRepublic
(1984)3 C LR 87. Republic ν Nissiotou
(1985)3 C LR 944. Theodossiadou and Othersν TheRepublic (\986) 3 C LR 178, Pitsillos ν CBC 25
(1982)3 CLR 208 Application. Application by the Cyprus Bar Association to be heard in pending proceedings before the Court whereby the constitutionality of section 2
(1)of the Advocates Law, Cap2 30 \as amendedby section 2 of Law No. 98/84) is challenged. A.S. Angehdes, for theapplicants. L. Demetriades, for the respondents- applicants. Y. Lazarou, for the respondentCentralBank. Cur, adv. vult. 35 446 3 C.L.R. Institute of Cert. Accts v. Republic PIKISJ readthefollowingjudgment Thecentral,ifnotthesole issue inthe proceedings, isthe constitutionality of section 2, subsection
(1)oftheAdvocates Law(asamendedbysection 2ofLaw 98/84), inparticular, thatpartthatprecludesanyone otherthanan 5 advocate from assuming any competence in relation to the preparation, revision, amendment of the memorandum and articlesofassociation ofacompanyoranyothermatterassociated with or incidental thereto As a matter of fact the fate of the recourseisdependant onjudicialpronouncement onthequestion 10 ofconstitutionality ofthepertinentprovisionsofthelaw.sincethe sub judice decision refusing the issuance of shares on the application of applicants, accountants, isfounded onthe relevant provisionsofsection 2
(1)oftheAdvocatesLaw TheCentralBank of Cyprus acting on legal advice refused toaccept an application 15 fortheissueofsharessubmitted byaccountants forthereason that itdid not onginate from and wasnot submitted byan advocate TheCyprusBarAssociationwasnotmadeaninterestedpartyin theproceedings and nonoticeoftheapplicationswasqiven them Onlearningofthependency oftheproceedingstheyappliedtobe 20 heardinthematter claimingarightofaudience Theapplicationis founded on the provisions of the Supreme Constitutional Court Rules notably, Rules 13, 17, 18and 19and the inherent powers of the Court Neither the applicants nor the respondents raised objection to 25 the application acknowledging that itisfair that theybe given an opportunity tobeheardinthecauseconsideringthatthemembers of the Association have a direct interest in the outcome of the proceedings Acknowledgment ofthepropnety ofthe application does not absolve the Court of the duty to decide whether it is 30 warranted in law To this end I applied myself guided by the fundamental preceptsofjustice,relevantconstitutional provisions and our case law Naturaljustice requiresthat everypartylikelyto beaffected bytheoutcomeofajudicialcauseormatter,should be afforded proper opportunity tobe heard and put hiscase before 35 thecourt Ofcoursetheinterestatriskmustbedirectaswellasthe prejudice likely to be occasioned thereby This rule of natural justice finds expression in Art 30 2 of the Constitution that safeguards a fair and publicheanng inthe determination of every one's civilnghtsand obligations Undoubtedly, section 2
(1)ofthe 40 Advocates Law confers civil nghts to the members of the Cyprus Bar Association that they are entitled to defend in proceedings 447 PlldsJ. Institute of Cert. Accto v. Republic
(1987)before every court of law. Moreover, paragraph 3 of Article 30 details theminimum rights associated with theexercise of the fundamental right safeguarded bythe preceding paragraph and requires, interalia, that noticebe given toevery party whose civil rights or obligations are inissue in any judicial proceedings. 5 Aseries ofdecisions ofthe Supreme Courtin theexercise ofits revisional jurisdiction acknowledge aright to every party directly interested in theoutcome ofa case totake part inthe proceedings in such manner as the justice ofthe case requires. In Vorkas and Others v. The Republic* the case law on the subject isreviewed 10 and the right ofa party directly interested inthe proceedingsto take part thereto,isacknowledged. Inthe same case referenceis made to the nature of the interest necessary to justify the participation ofthe third party, whereas in asubsequent decision of the Supreme Court notably the Republic v.Nissiotou** it is 15 affirmed that the intervention ofathird party can only be for the purpose of supporting thedecision. Rightly so for any other approach to the matter might lead to by-passing the mandatory provisions of paragraph 3 ofArticle 146 thatenjoins that challenge to administrative action can only be mountedwithin 75 days from 20 its communication. Lastly, inTheodossiadou and Others v. The Republic**^ was pointed outthat theprocedure for appearance in the capacity of amicus curiae is no substitute fortherightto appear as an interested party inproceedings of judicial review of administrative action. 25 One has only to contemplate the effects that a declarationof unconstitutionality ofthe relevant enactment would have on the interest ofmembers ofthe Cyprus Bar Association, torealize that the Cyprus BarAssociation has every right to appear in the proceedings. Theprofessional interests ofits members, primarily 30 financial, are directly atissueandon thataccountthey are entitled to be heard inthe cause. Consequently, the professional body representing them, the Cyprus Bar Association, islegitimizedin the pursuitofthe defence oftheir rights.**** •
(1984)3 C.L.R 87 "
(1985)3C.LR 944 " ·
(1986)3CL.R. 178. ' · * * See Pitsillos v. C.B.C
(1982)3C.L.R.208, for αdiscussion of thepreiequisitesnecessary for appearanceby arepresentativebody. 448 3 C.L.R. Institute of Cert. Accts v. Republic PlfclsJ. Inthelightoftheabovetheapplication issustained TheCyprus Bar Association will be at liberty to file within 15 days a separate opposition insupport of the subjudice decision The case is fix^d for oral hearing on 13th June, 1987 at 9 15 5am Application granted 449