Resolution ResDH(2001)158
concerning the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
of 25 January 2000 (final on 25 April 2000) and of 25 May 2000 (final on 25 August 2000)
(Article 41) in the case of Miragall Escolano and others against Spain
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 December 2001
at the 775th 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 judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the Miragall Escolano and others case delivered on 25 January 2000 and 25 May 2000 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once they had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the case originated in several applications (Nos. 38366/97, 38688/97, 40777/98, 40843/98, 41015/98, 41400/98, 41446/98, 41484/98, 41487/98 and 41509/98) against Spain, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 16 September and 10 November 1997, 26 March, 14 and 15 April, 18, 25, 27 and 26 May 1998 respectively, under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Juan Miragall Escolano, Ms María de la Cinta Andreu Rocamora, Ms María Victoría Bonet Vilar, Mr Valentín Gómez López, Mr José Antonio Soriano Rams, Mr Francisco Monforte Sancho, Ms María Dolores García Moreno, Mr José Roig Espert, Mr Salvador Roig Espert and Ms Ana María Icardo García , ten Spanish nationals, and that the Court, seized of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint concerning the applicants’ right to access to a tribunal to examine their demand for compensation;
Whereas in its judgment of 25 January 2000 the Court:
- held, by six votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held, unanimously, that that the question of the application of Article 41 was not ready for decision in so far as the pecuniary damage was concerned, accordingly:
a) Reserved the said question;
b) invited the Government and the applicants to submit, within the forthcoming three months, their written observations on the matter and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement that they may have reached;
c) reserved the further procedure and delegated to the President of the Chamber the power to fix the same if need be;
Whereas in its judgment of 25 May 2000 (Article 41) the Court:
- decided to strike the case out of the list, after having taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the parties, in which it was agreed that the Government of Spain would pay the applicants the following sums:
Mr Juan Miragall Escolano 3,204,629 pesetas
Ms María Cinta Andreu Rocamora 3,166,977 pesetas
Ms María Victoría Bonet Vilar 1,020,016 pesetas
Mr Valentín Gómez López 1,265,893 pesetas
Mr José Antonio Soriano Rams 1,203,846 pesetas
Mr Francisco Montforte Sancho 2,236,887 pesetas
Ms María Dolores García Moreno 1,772,678 pesetas
Mr José Roig Espert 1,759,173 pesetas
Mr Salvador Roig Espert 6,999,318 pesetas
Ms Ana María Icardo García 983,053 pesetas
Having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols;
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 judgments of 25 January 2000 and 25 May 2000, having regard to Spain’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 gave the Committee information about the measures taken preventing new violations of the same kind as that found in the present judgment; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;
Having satisfied itself that on 10 April 2000, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 25 May 2000,
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Spain, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2001)158
Information provided by the Government of Spain
during the examination of the Miragall Escolano and others case
by the Committee of Ministers
The Spanish Government has informed the Committee of Ministers that, given the adoption of the new Ley de la jurisdicción Contencioso-Administrativa (Law on Conflicts of Jurisdiction in Administrative Cases - Law 29/1998 of 13 July), the controversy concerning the identification of the first day of the time-limit allowed for lodging an appeal against judgments annulling general provisions (i.e., the date of notification or the date of publication) no longer arises.
Article 72, paragraph 2, of the new law provides that the annulment of a provision or an act shall have effect for all persons concerned. Final judgments annulling a general provision shall take effect from the date of their publication in the same official journal in which the annulled provision had been promulgated. Judgments without appeal annulling administrative acts concerning many persons the number of which is indeterminate, shall also be published.
Lastly, the Spanish government has informed the Committee that the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in this case has been published in the supplement no. 1891 of the Official Bulletin of the Ministry of Justice of 15 April 2001, pp. 20-25, and that it has also been transmitted to all authorities directly concerned.
The Government of Spain considers that the measures taken will prevent the repetition of any new violations similar to those found in this case and that it has therefore fulfilled its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy