Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)215[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Hachette Filipacchi Associés (“Ici Paris”) against France
(Application No. 12268/03, judgment of 23/07/2009, final on 23/10/2009)
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 transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the infringement of the right to freedom of expression of the applicant, a publishing company, due to a court decision on 2002 ordering it to pay 20 000 EUR as damages following the publication in 1996 of an article illustrated with four pictures of the singer Johnny Hallyday (violation of Article 10) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken 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, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:
- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)215
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Hachette Filipacchi Associés (“Ici Paris”) against France
Introductory case summary
This case concerns a violation of the freedom of expression of the applicant, a publishing company which in 2002 was unjustifiably ordered to pay 20 000 EUR for damages and costs following the publication in 1996 of an article, illustrated with four pictures of the singer Johnny Hallyday (violation of Article 10).
The European Court found that the previous disclosures by the singer himself (in his autobiography) of the information at issue weakened the degree of protection to which he was entitled with regard to his private life. This decisive criterion should have been taken into account by the French court in its assessment of the publishing company's claimed misconduct. The European Court also found that the reasons given by the domestic courts were not sufficient to demonstrate that the interference claimed in the applicant company's right was "necessary in a democratic society".
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
26 000 EUR
-
10 000 EUR
36 000 EUR
Paid on 11/03/2010, with default interests.
b) Individual measures
The European Court awarded to the applicant company, in respect of the pecuniary damage suffered, the amount it was condemned to pay by the French courts.
Consequently, no other individual measure is considered necessary.
II.General measures
The legislative texts were not called into question in this case. On the contrary, it was the domestic court’s application of Article 9 of the Civil Code which was criticised by the European Court. Consequently, measures have been taken by the French authorities to ensure that the European Court's judgment is widely publicised, so that the competent courts may take account of it in practice through the Convention’s direct application.
Thus the judgment was the subject of an information note of 17/11/2009 from the Ministry of Justice (Chancellerie) to the prosecuting authorities at the Court of Appeal of Versailles, and also sent out by the Observatoire de droit européen of the Cour de Cassation through its six-monthly newsletter on European law (which may be consulted on line on the court's intranet).
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that no individual measure is required, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that France has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 December 2010 at the 1100th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy