The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32
(art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights
and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the
Convention"),
Having regard to the report drawn up by the European
Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31
(art. 31) of the Convention relating to the application lodged
on 19 January 1986 by Mr Carsten Jacobsen against Sweden
(Application No. 12032/86);
Whereas on 27 May 1991 the Commission transmitted the said
report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of
three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1),
of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been
brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance
of Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;
Whereas in his application the applicant complained inter
alia that he had no access to a court concerning a dispute over
a building prohibition on his property;
Whereas the Commission declared the application admissible
on 13 March 1989 and in its report adopted on 10 April 1991
expressed unanimously the opinion that there had been a violation
of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention, no
violation of Article 1 of the first protocol (P1-1), no violation
of Article 17 (art. 17) nor of Article 18 (art. 18) and that it
was not necessary to examine separately whether there had been
a violation of Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;
Whereas, at the 462nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
held on 27 September 1991, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing
with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted
in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1
(art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been in this case
a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the
Convention but no violation of Articles 17 and 18 (art. 17,
art. 18) and of Article 1 of the first protocol (P1-1);
Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals
made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards
just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals
supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated
10 April 1992;
Whereas on 15 May 1992 the Committee of Ministers held, in
accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2 (art. 32-2), of the
Convention, that the Government of Sweden was to pay the
applicant within three months 10 000 Swedish crowns in respect
of non-pecuniary damage and 35 000 Swedish crowns in respect of
costs and expenses;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government
of Sweden to inform it of the measures taken following its
decisions of 27 September 1991 and 15 May 1992, having regard to
Sweden's obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4),
of the Convention to abide by them;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on
18 June 1992 the Government of Sweden paid the applicant the
total sum of 45 000 Swedish crowns in respect of just
satisfaction;
Whereas the Government of Sweden informed the Committee of
Ministers that the Plan and Building Act 1987 and the act of
21 April 1988 on judicial review of certain administrative
decisions, already mentioned inter alia in Resolution DH(92)23
concerning the Wollart case, would apply to situations comparable
to the one at issue in the present case,
Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the
Government of Sweden, that it has exercised its functions under
Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this case;
Authorised the publication of the report adopted by the
Commission in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy