Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)27[1]
Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S. and 6 other similar cases
against the Czech Republic
(See detail in Appendix)
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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;
Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern the lack of access to the Constitutional Court due to its excessively formal interpretation of the admissibility rules concerning the exhaustion of remedies and time-limit for bringing such appeals (violations of Article 6§1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with the Czech Republic's obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgments;
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 applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the 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
- 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 these cases and
DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.
Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2008)27
Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgments
in the cases of Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S. and 6 other similar cases
against the Czech Republic
Introductory case summary
These cases concern the violation of the applicants' right of access to a court due to the dismissal of their complaints by the Constitutional Court as a result of contradictions in its jurisprudence likely to cause confusion concerning the exhaustion of remedies and the point of departure of the time-limit for bringing such appeals.
In certain cases, the Constitutional Court rejected the applicants' complaints as being out of time, reproaching them for having instituted cassation proceedings before lodging their constitutional complaints. In others, it declared their complaints inadmissible for non-exhaustion of the remedies foreseen by the law, on the ground that they had not appealed on points of law or their appeal before the Supreme Court was still pending. Finally, in the case of Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S., the applicant company's complaint was rejected a first time for non-exhaustion of the cassation proceedings, and a second time – for being out of time, following the dismissal of the complaint by the Supreme Court.
The European Court found that the Constitutional Court's interpretation of the admissibility rules was excessively formal (violations of Article 6§1).
I.Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures
a) Details of just satisfaction
The European Court concluded that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicants in the Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S., Mařík and Šroub cases. The Court awarded no just satisfaction in the four other cases since the applicants did not submit any claim in this respect.
Name and application number
Pecuniary damage
Non-pecuniary damage
Costs and expenses
Total
Paid on
Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S., judgment of 24/02/2004, final on 07/07/2004 (73577/01)
-
-
700 EUR
700 EUR
24/09/2004
Mařík, judgment of 12/04/2005, final on 12/10/2005 (73116/01)
-
-
1 000 EUR
1 000 EUR
06/01/2006
Šroub, judgment of 17/01/2006, final on 03/07/2006 (5424/03)
-
-
300 EUR
300 EUR
27/09/2006
Turek, judgment of 21/06/2005, final on 21/09/2005 (73403/01)
No just satisfaction awarded
Pillmann, judgment of 27/09/2005, final on 27/12/2005 (15333/02)
No just satisfaction awarded
Páleník, judgment of 21/06/2005, final on 12/10/2005 (64737/01)
No just satisfaction awarded
Friedrich, judgment of 26/10/2006, final on 26/01/2007 (12108/03)
No just satisfaction awarded
b) Individual measures
Considering the nature of the violation, the absence of very serious consequences for the applicants and the fact that their cases had been considered on the merits at both first instance and appeal, no specific individual measures would appear to be necessary. In addition, the applicants have submitted no claim for such measures.
II.General measures
Following two earlier similar cases, Běleš and others (judgment of 12/11/2002, closed with Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)115) and Zvolský and Zvolská (judgment of 12/11/2002, closed with Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)30), the Czech authorities have adopted a number of measures to prevent new, similar violations.
(a) The plenary of the Constitutional Court changed its practice in 2003 (communication published in the Official Journal No. 32/2003 of 3 February 2003) by allowing the simultaneous introduction of an extraordinary appeal and a constitutional appeal directed against the decision of a lower jurisdiction which has attained legal force in relation to the subject-matter (see §21 of the judgment of the European Court in the case of Vodárenská Akciová Společnost, A.S.).
(b) Thereafter, the Parliament adopted the law No. 83/2004 (entered into force on 1 April 2004) which amended the previous law No. 182/1993 on the Constitutional Court. According to the new law (Article 75§1), an extraordinary appeal of which the admissibility depends only on the discretionary assessment of the competent authority, does not necessarily have to be exhausted before seizing the Constitutional Court. Moreover, if an extraordinary appeal is declared inadmissible by the competent authority only on the basis of its discretionary assessment, a constitutional appeal can be lodged within 60 days starting from the notification of the decision relating to the admissibility of the appeal at stake (Article 72§4).
The judgments of the European Court have been translated and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice () and disseminated to the authorities concerned.
III.Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures taken will prevent new, similar violations and that the Czech Republic has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.
[1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 27 March 2008 at the 1020th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy