Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)28[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Cruz da Silva Coelho case against Portugal
(Application No. 9388/02, judgment of 13 December 2005, friendly settlement)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);
Having regard to the judgment in this case, transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the applicant’s admissible complaints in this case concerned the alleged failure of the respondent state to act to prevent illegal sand extraction from a beach on the banks of the river Tagus which led to the drowning of her son (complaint under Article 2), as well as the alleged impossibility to obtain a decision on a case-law conflict on this issue (complaint under Articles 6 and 14).
Whereas in this case the Court, having taken formal note of friendly settlement reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicant, and having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols decided, unanimously, to strike this case out of its list and took note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a re-hearing of the cases before the Grand Chamber;
Whereas under this friendly settlement it was agreed that the government of the respondent state would pay the applicant the sum of 75 000 EUR for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages, as well as 2 000 EUR for costs and expenses, within three months as from the notification of the judgment;
Recalling that the striking-out of a case which has been declared admissible is effected by means of a judgment which the Court forwards to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final in order to allow it to supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance, friendly settlement or solution of the matter;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that on 18 January 2006, within the time-limit agreed to under the terms of the friendly settlement, the government of the respondent state paid the applicant the sums provided in the friendly settlement and that no other measure was required in these cases to comply with the Court’s judgment;
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention with respect to the commitments subscribed to in this case and DECIDES to close its examination.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 March 2010 at the 1078th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy