The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54
(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the
Convention"),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human
Rights in the Brandstetter case delivered on 28 August 1991 and
transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in three applications
against Austria lodged with the European Commission of Human
Rights on 6 September 1984, 13 March 1987 and 21 October 1987
under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by
Mr Karl Brandstetter, an Austrian national, who complained inter
alia that the public prosecutor's submissions filed before the
appellate court in defamation proceedings against him were not
communicated to him;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the
Commission on 11 July 1990 and by the Government of Austria on
1 October 1990;
Whereas in its judgment of 28 August 1991 the Court:
- held unanimously that, in the proceedings concerning the
quality of the wine, there was no violation of Article 6,
paragraph 1, taken in conjunction with Article 6, paragraph 3.d
(art. 6-1, art. 6-3-d);
- held unanimously that, in the same proceedings, there was
no violation of Article 6, paragraph 3.c (art. 6-3-c);
- rejected unanimously the preliminary objection which the
government raised as regards expert evidence in the proceedings
concerning the charge of tampering with evidence;
- held unanimously that, in those proceedings, there was no
violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, taken in conjunction with
Article 6, paragraph 3.d (art. 6-1, art. 6-3-d);
- held unanimously that, as regards those proceedings, it was
not necessary to examine the other complaints under Article 6,
paragraphs 1 and 2 (art. 6-1, art. 6-2);
- held unanimously that, in the defamation proceedings, there
was no violation of Article 6, paragraph 3.c (art. 6-3-c);
- held by six votes to three that, in those proceedings, there
was a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1) on appeal;
- held unanimously that the respondent state was to pay to the
applicant, for costs and expenses, 60 000 Austrian schillings;
- dismissed unanimously the remainder of the claim for just
satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of
Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of
the Convention;
Having invited the Government of Austria to inform it of the
measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of
28 August 1991, having regard to its obligation under Article 53
(art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Austria paid
to the applicant on 9 October 1991 the sum provided for in the
judgment,
Declares that it has exercised its functions under
Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy