Resolution ResDH(2003)94
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 21 May 2002 (final on 21 August 2002)
in the case of Peltier against France
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 June 2003
at the 841st 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 Peltier case delivered on 21 May 2002 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. 32872/96) against France, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 12 July 1996 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Jean Peltier, a French national, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint concerning, on the one hand, the lack of access to a tribunal to challenge a speeding ticket, the public prosecutor having rejected the applicant’s appeal against the fine and request for a Court hearing on grounds not provided in the relevant legislation; on the other hand, a disregard of the presumption of innocence;
Whereas in its judgment of 21 May 2002 the Court unanimously:
- held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;
- held that no separate issue arose under Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
- held that the present judgment constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for the non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant;
- held that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 381,12 euros in respect of pecuniary damage; 3 500 euros in respect of costs and expenses and that simple interest at an annual rate of 4,26% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement ;
- dismissed the remainder of the applicant’s 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 21 May 2002, having regard to France’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 indicated that the Court’s judgment had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;
Having satisfied itself that on 7 November 2002, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 21 May 2002;
Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy