Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)95
Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia, A.S. against the Slovak Republic
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
(Application No. 41262/05, judgment of 26 July 2011, final on 26 October 2011)
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 29 May 2013 at the 1171st 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, 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 final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established;
Recalling the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it is party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:
- of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its above-mentioned obligation;
Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment and noting that no award of just satisfaction was made by the Court in the present case (see document DH-DD(2013)112);
Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted,
DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case; and
DECIDES to close the examination thereof.
Action report
Application No. 41262/05 Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia,a.s. v. Slovak Republic
judgment of 26/06/2011, final on 26/10/2011
Introductory case summary
This case concerns the violation of the freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention. In its judgment, the Court considered that it was crucial that the domestic courts make a careful assessment of the presence and level of public interest in the publishing of the impugned information in the present case as well as strike a balance between any such public interest and the individual interests of those concerned since, as a matter of principle, domestic courts are better equipped to establish the facts relevant to the ensuing legal analysis. This also applies to the issue of the bona fides of the applicant company’s legal predecessor and other aspects of the case that are necessary for establishing whether the applicant company’s legal predecessor had acted in accordance with the “duties and responsibilities” inherent in Article 10 § 2 of the Convention. The Court considered that by failing to examine these elements of the case, the domestic courts cannot be said to have “applied standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article 10” and to have “based themselves on an acceptable assessment of the relevant facts”. The foregoing considerations were sufficient to enable the Court to conclude that the legal protection received by the applicant company’s legal predecessor at the domestic level was not compatible with the requirements of Article 10 of the Convention.
The applicant’s complaint concerning the violation of Article 6 § 1 was dismissed by the Court.
I. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
1) Just satisfaction
As the applicant did not submit a claim for just satisfaction, the Court considered that there is no call to award him any sum on that account (§ 121 of the judgment).
2) Individual measures
The applicant requested a reopening of the proceedings according Article 228 § 1 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The request was granted on 9 November 2011. The proceedings (registered under new file number 7C 251/2011) are pending.
In conclusion, no other individual measures appear necessary.
II. General measures
Publication and dissemination
The judgment was published in the Judicial Revue (Justičná Revue) No. 2/2012. The judgment has been sent by a letter of the Minister of Justice of 19 March 2012 to the presidents of the regional courts with a request to acquaint all regional and district court presidents with the judgment who then acquaint all district court judges with that judgment.
In conclusion, no other general measures appear necessary.
III. Conclusions of the respondent State
The government considers that the Slovak Republic has thus complied with their obligations under Article 46 § 1 of the Convention.
In Bratislava, 6 February 2013
Marica Pirošíková
Agent of the Slovak Republic
before the European Court of Human Rights
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy