Resolution ResDH(2005)101
concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
of 24 June 2003 (final on 3 December 2003))
in the case of Stretch against the United Kingdom
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 26 October 2005
at the 940th 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 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),
Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Stretch case delivered on 24 June 2003 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;
Recalling that the judgment of the Court became final on 3 December 2003 since, at this date, the government of the respondent state was informed that the applicant's request for a re-hearing before the Grand Chamber had been dismissed;
Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 44277/98) against the United Kingdom, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 21 October 1998 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Michael Stretch, a British national, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible the complaint concerning a disproportionate interference with the applicant's peaceful enjoyment of his possessions due to the denial in 1991 of his option for a further term of twenty-one years under a lease concluded with a local authority, this interference being particularly disproportionate given the importance of this option to the initial conclusion of the lease and its apparent lawfulness at the time;
Whereas in its judgment of 24 June 2003 the Court unanimously:
- held, that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No 1 of the Convention;
- 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, 5 000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage, 31 000 euros in respect of pecuniary damage and 45 000 euros in respect of costs and expenses, to be converted into pounds Sterling at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable and that simple interest at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points shall be payable 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 24 June 2003, having regard to the United Kingdom'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 3 March 2004, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 24 June 2003,
Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy