Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)98[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Sacilor-Lormines against France
(Application No. 65411/01, judgment of 9 November 2006, final on 9 February 2007)
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 judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;
Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the unfairness of proceedings, a breach of the right to a fair trial before the Conseil d’Etat and the length of proceedings before the administrative courts (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;
Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;
Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate:
- of individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum; and
- of general measures preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix) and considering the decision taken in the Sacilor-Lormines case at the 1051st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (17 March 2009), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and
DECIDES to close the examination of this case.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2010)98
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Sacilor-Lormines against France
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the unfairness of proceedings amounting to a breach to the right to a fair trial before the Conseil d’Etat due to the presence of a certain member of that body, who was then appointed General Secretary of the Ministry of the Economy, Finance and Industry, on the bench which rendered a judgment in May 2000 concerning a dispute between the applicant company and this Ministry (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1). The European Court held that the applicant “had objectively justified misgivings ex post facto about the independence and impartiality of the bench on which the member in question had sat”, insofar as during the deliberation, the future appointment of this member was already under discussion.
The case also concerns a violation of the right to a fair trial due to the presence of the Government Commissioner at the deliberations before the Conseil d’Etat (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1).
Finally, the case concerns the lengths of two sets of proceedings before the Conseil d’Etat, resulting in a breach of the applicant’s right to be heard within a reasonable time (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
8 000 EUR
10 000 EUR
18 000 EUR
Paid on 16/03/2007
b) Individual measures
Before the European Court, the applicant company claimed just satisfaction in respect of the alleged pecuniary damage corresponding, according to the applicant company, to certain costs of execution incurred in the context of the unfair domestic proceedings. The Court dismissed this claim in the absence of causality between the alleged damage and the findings of violations.
As for non-pecuniary damage related to the unfairness of the proceedings, it considered that the findings of violations constituted themselves sufficient just satisfaction. On the other hand, it awarded just satisfaction in respect of the non-pecuniary damage incurred by the excessive length of proceedings.
In the context of the domestic proceedings, the applicant company’s main claim was to have the respondent state accept the applicant’s renunciation of its last eight mining concessions. It should be noted here that the Minister of Industry accepted those renunciations in 2006 by orders available on the official website .
Under those circumstances, there remains no potential adverse consequence of the violation. No other individual measure was therefore considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.
II.General measures
1) Independence and impartiality of the Conseil d’Etat
Since this violation results from the specific circumstances of the case, the measures taken to draw the attention of administrative court judges to the judgment are sufficient to avoid further similar violations. The Conseil d’Etat documentation centre provided a wide publication and circulation of the judgment to all administrative courts through the Intranet websites of both the Conseil d’Etat and the administrative courts and courts of appeal.
2) Presence of the Government Commissioner in the deliberations before the Conseil d’Etat
A connection may be made between this case and the Kress and other similar cases, examination of which was closed in the light of the general measures adopted after the material time in the present case. For details of the measures adopted, see Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)44 (before the Conseil d’Etat, parties are now entitled to request that the Government Commissioner - renamed Public Rapporteur - should not be present at the deliberations, and are duly informed of this possibility).
3) Undue length of proceedings before administrative courts
A connection may be made between this case and other cases concerning excessive length of proceedings before administrative courts, examination of which was closed in the light of the general measures adopted after the material time in the present case (inter alia recruitments and procedural measures). Details of the measures adopted are given in Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)12 concerning the case of Raffi against France and thirty other cases.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that France has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 September 2010 at the 1092nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy