Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)87[1]
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
SC Maşinexportimport Industrial Group SA against Romania
(Application No. 22687/03, judgment of 1 December 2005, final on 1 March 2006)
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 violations of the Convention found by the Court in this case concern the annulment of a final court decision by the Supreme Court following the application for nullity lodged by the Prosecutor General (Article 6§1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with Romania’s 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), 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(2008)87
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
SC Maşinexportimport Industrial Group SA against Romania
Introductory case summary
The case concerns the Supreme Court’s annulment on 17/02/2003 of a final court decision of 31/01/2001 following the application for nullity lodged by the Prosecutor General based on Article 330(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure which allowed him to challenge final court decisions within one year.
The Court noted that, as in the case of Brumărescu (judgment of 28/10/1999, Final Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)90), there had been a violation of the applicant company’s right to a fair trial on account of the Prosecutor General’s intervention in civil proceedings to which he was not a party and the overturning of a final judgment which had the authority of res judicata and had, moreover, been executed (violation of Article 6§1).
The Court also found that the Supreme Court’s decision led to the applicant company’s being deprived of its possession since it was under the obligation to reimburse the sums received under a final decision of a domestic court (violations of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1).
I.Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
-
5 000 EUR
-
5 000 EUR
Paid on 19/05/2006
b) Individual measures
When the Court delivered its judgment, enforcement proceedings were pending against the applicant company for recovery of the damages received under the final court decision of 31/01/2001. On 27/11/2006 the High Court of Cassation and Justice granted the revision requested by the applicant company of the decision of 17/02/2003. Consequently, the enforcement proceedings were dropped. The Court also awarded the applicant company just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
II.General measures
The Government recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new similar violations, these measures were presented in Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)90 mentioned above (in particular the fact that Articles 330 and 330(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure were repealed by Article 1§17 of Emergency Ordinance No. 58 of 25/06/2003 adopted by the government, published in the Official Gazette on 28/06/2003, and approved by Parliament on 25/05/2004). The judgment was published on the Internet site of the High Court of Cassation and Justice ().
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken have fully remedied the consequences for the applicant of the violations of the Convention found by the Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new, similar violations and that Romania has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 8 October 2008 at the 1035th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy