resolution DH (99) 9
HUMAN RIGHTS
APPLICATION No. 23339/94
SOCIÉTÉ AZUL RÉSIDENCE AND RENÉ ÉSPANOL AGAINST FRANCE
(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 18 January 1999
at the 654th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)
The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 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 on 26 June 1996 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 26 July 1993 by a French company Société Azul Résidence and a French national, Mr René Espanol, against France;
Whereas on 23 July 1996 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, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 of the Convention;
Whereas in their application, as declared admissible by the Commission on 15 January 1996, the applicants complained of the excessive length of certain proceedings concerning civil rights and obligations before the administrative courts and of the excessive length of certain criminal proceedings;
Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, by twelve votes to one, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain proceedings in which state-approvals were quashed, by ten votes of three, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain proceedings in which a planning permission was quashed, and by twelve votes to one, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain criminal proceedings;
Whereas at the 582nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreed with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 28 January 1997, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain proceedings in which state-approvals were quashed, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain proceedings in which a planning permission was quashed, and that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regard the length of certain criminal proceedings;
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 applicants, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 16 December 1997;
Whereas at the 618th meeting of the Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the Commission's proposals, held by a decision adopted on 18 February 1998, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the government of the respondent State was to pay as just satisfaction, within three months, to Mr René Espanol 50 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage, and 16 800 French francs in respect of costs and expenses and to the Société Azul Résidence, 13 860 French francs in respect of costs and expenses, namely a total sum of 80 720 French francs, and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicants;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 28 January 1997 and 18 February 1998, having regard to France’s obligation under Article 32, paragraph 4, of the Convention to abide by them;
Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent State accordingly recalled that measures had already been taken to prevent the repetition of the violation found in this case, notably through the setting up of administrative courts of appeal, the redefinition of the competences of the Conseil d’Etat and the increase of personnel and means in order to speed up the administrative proceedings (see Resolution DH (95) 254 in the case of Beaumartin) and indicated that the Commission's report had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that within the time-limit set the government of the respondent State paid the applicants the total sum of 80 720 French francs as just satisfaction,
Declares, after having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case;
Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy