Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)227
Roman Minarik against Czech Republic
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Application No.
Case
Judgment of
Final on
58874/11
ROMAN MINARIK
22/11/2012
22/02/2013
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 November 2013
at the 1185th (Budget) 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 this 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 has been a 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 the above-mentioned obligation;
Having examined information provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see details in Appendix);
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.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)227
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of Roman Minarik against the Czech Republic
Introductory case summary
The applicant was a minority shareholder of a joint stock company whose winding up in 2002 had been decided by a resolution adopted by votes of the main shareholder. After the company had been deleted from the Commercial register, according to the legislation applicable at that time, the applicant did not have a standing to participate in the proceedings before domestic courts to set the adopted resolution aside. As a result, he was deprived of his shares.
The Court concluded that there had been a violation of the applicant’s right to access to a tribunal (violation of Article 6§1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
-
4 144 EUR
4 144 EUR
Paid on 09/05/2013
b) Individual measures
The applicant had asked the Court to grant him just satisfaction in respect of the alleged pecuniary damage consisting of the difference between the real value of the shares of the company at issue and the amount of settlement he received for those shares. The Court held that there was no causal link between the damage alleged and the violation found. Thus it rejected the claim. Accordingly, no individual measure was considered necessary apart from the payment of the sum awarded for costs and expenses.
II.General measures
The legislation that was at the root of the violation was amended by Act No. 355/2011, which entered into force on 1 January 2012. The Committee of Ministers has already taken note of this legislative amendment in Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)140 adopted in the case of Kohlhofer and Minarik and 4 other similar cases.
III.Conclusions of the respondent State
The government considers that no individual measure is required in this case, apart from the payment of the just satisfaction, that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that the Czech Republic has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy