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 2 January 1989 by Mr S.A. against Portugal
(Application No. 14926/89);
Whereas on 11 March 1993 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, as declared admissible by the
Commission on 13 May 1992, the applicant complained of the
excessive length of certain civil proceedings and of an
infringement of his right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions;
Whereas in its report adopted on 10 February 1993, the
Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been
a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention
and that no separate issue arose under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
(P1-1);
Whereas, at the 498th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, held
on 21 September 1993, 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;
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 11 March 1994;
Whereas, at the 512th meeting of the Deputies, held on
3 May 1994, the Committee of Ministers decided, in accordance with
Article 32, paragraph 2 (art. 32-2), of the Convention, that the
Government of Portugal was to pay the applicant as just
satisfaction, within three months, 500 000 escudos in respect of
non-pecuniary damage and 87 000 escudos in respect of costs and
expenses, namely a total sum of 587 000 escudos;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of
Portugal to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions
of 21 September 1993 and 3 May 1994, having regard to Portugal's
obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the
Convention to abide by them;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee
of Ministers, the Government of Portugal gave the Committee
information about the measures taken in consequence of the
Committee's decisions, which information appears in the appendix to
this resolution;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 14
October 1994 the Government of Portugal paid the applicant the
total sum of 587 000 escudos as just satisfaction,
Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the
Government of Portugal, that it has exercised its functions under
Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this case;
Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the
Commission in this case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (94) 82
Information provided by the Government of Portugal
during the examination of the S.A. case
by the Committee of Ministers
Through the Act of 20 August 1992 (No. 24/92), as implemented
by the decree of 15 September 1993 (No. 312/93) and by the
legislative decree of 17 June 1994 (No. 222/94), the Government of
Portugal has adopted an important reform in order to remedy the
overload of cases pending before the courts by reorganising the
court system and by speeding up the examination of the cases.
This reform has comprised, inter alia, a redefinition of the
territorial jurisdiction of the courts; the specialisation of
certain courts; the establishment in the districts of Lisbon and
Porto of courts with competence in civil and criminal matters; the
temporary creation of auxiliary courts in order to alleviate the
case-load of certain courts. Moreover, the total number of courts
and judges has been increased. Finally, the most important
districts, notably Lisbon, Porto, Coimbra, Almada, Funchal and
Loures have been subject to important reforms.
The government considers that these measures will be
sufficient to prevent the repetition of the kind of violation of
the Convention found in the present case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy