Resolution ResDH(2003)69
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 27 April 2000 (final on 27 July 2000)
in the case of L. against Finland
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 24 April 2003
at the 834th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the L. case delivered on 27 April 2000 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 25651/94) against Finland, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 7 September 1994 under former Article 25 of the Convention by two applicants (“the applicant father” and “the applicant grandfather”), both Finnish nationals, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaints concerning first the taking of the first applicant’s children into public care and in particular the access restrictions, and secondly concerning the lack of an oral hearing before the County Administrative Court;
Whereas in its judgment of 27 April 2000 the Court unanimously:
- held that there had been no violation of Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention;
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention, in relation to the lack of an oral hearing before the County Administrative Court;
- held that the present judgment constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction in respect of any non-pecuniary damage;
- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicants, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 35 000 Finnish marks less 24 560,60 French francs to be converted into Finnish marks at the rate applicable on the date of delivery of the present judgment in respect of costs and expenses and that simple interest at an annual rate of 10% would be payable on this sum from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;
- dismissed the remainder of the applicants’ claim for just satisfaction;
Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 27 April 2000, having regard to Finland’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it;
Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state drew the Committee’s attention to the fact that, on account of the specific circumstances of the case new, similar violations of the Convention could be avoided for the future by informing the authorities concerned of the requirements of the Convention: copies of the judgment had accordingly been sent out to them as well as to the High Supreme Court, the High Administrative Court, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice; the Court’s judgment has been published on the Internet, on the judicial database FINLEX (www.finlex.fi) ; in addition, information about the judgment and the interpretation of the European Court had also been given during meetings arranged by the Ministry of Justice annually, or twice a year for appellate courts and for civil, criminal and administrative courts;
Having satisfied itself that on 24 October 2000, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sum provided for in the judgment of 27 April 2000;
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Finland, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy