AFFAIRE RINGIER AXEL SPRINGER SLOVAKIA, A.S. CONTRE LA SLOVAQUIE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2013)95 Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia, A.S. împotriva Republicii Slovace Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Recherche n 41262/05, Hotărârea din 26 iulie 2011, definitivă la 26 octombrie 2011) (adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 29 mai 2013 în cadrul celei de a 1171-a ședințe a Delegaților de Miniștri) Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede ca Comitetul să supravegheze executarea hotărârilor definitive ale Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (denumite în continuare "convenția" și "Curtea"), Având în vedere hotărârea definitivă care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului în cauza de mai sus și încălcarea constatată reamintind obligația statului pârât, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (1) (1) din Convenție, să se conformeze hotărârilor definitive în litigiile la care este parte și că această obligație implică, pe lângă plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte, adoptarea de către autoritățile din statul membru în cauză, dacă este necesar de măsuri individuale pentru a pune capăt încălcărilor constatate și pentru a elimina consecințele acestora, în măsura posibilului de către Restitutio in integrum de măsuri generale de prevenire a unor încălcări similare ; Am invitat guvernul statului pârât să informeze Comitetul cu privire la măsurile luate pentru a se conforma obligației După examinarea bilanțului de acțiune furnizat de guvern care indică măsurile adoptate în vederea executării hotărârii și notarea faptului că a fost acordată o satisfacție echitabilă de către Curte în prezenta cauză (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013)telegând că au fost adoptate toate măsurile impuse prin art. 46 alineatul (1), DECLAMENTUL pe care și l-a îndeplinit în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenție în această cauză; și DECIDE d.n.n.: examinare. Acțiune reportare Application No. 41262/05 Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia, a.s. v. Slovak Republic Judgment of 26/06/2011, final on 26/10/2011 (numai engleză) Introductory case summary Această rubrică se referă la încălcarea articolului 10 din Convenție din partea freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention. In its judgment the Court considered that it was crucial that the domestic Courts make a careful assessment of the presence and level of public interest in the public interest in the publicsings of the impugned information in the present case as well as strike a balance between any such public interest and the individual interess of those sesisted since, as a matter of principle, domestic Courts are better equipped to establish thefacts care se referă la ensuing legal analis. Acest also appies to the issue of the bona fides of the applicant company The Court considered that by failing to examinare these elements of the case, the domestic scurts cannot be said to have Conclus de that the legal protection received by the applicant company mais legal predecescus at the domestic level was not compatibil with the requirements of Article 10 of the convention. The applicant applicant.s complaint cu privire la încălcarea articolului 6 alineatul (1) was dismissed by the Court. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures 1) Doar satisfaction As the aplicant did not submit a claim for just satisfaction, the Court considered that there is no call to award you sum on that account (§ 121 of the judgment). 2) Individual measures The applicant requested a reopening of the proceseding acording art. 228 alineatul (1) (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The request was granted on 9 November 2011. The proceseedings (registed under new file number 7C 251/2011) are agățat. In concluzie, no other individual Measures appear necessary. II. General Measures Publication and disemination The judgment was publicshed in the Judicial Review (excludere, nr. other individual Measures appear necessary. II. General Measures Publication the judgment was publicshed in the Judicial review) Justičná Review ) No. 2/2012. The judgment has been simte by a letter of the Minister of Justice of 19 March 2012 to the presidents of the regional Courts with a request to acquaint all regional and district scurt presidents with the judgment who then acquaint all district scurt judges with that judgment. In concluzie, no other general measures appear necessary. III. Concluzii ale respondentului State The government considers that the Slovak Republic has thus compliment with their obligations under Articol § 1 of the Convention. In Bratislava, 6 February 2013 Marica Pirošíková Agent of the Slovak Republic before the European Court of Human Righ

Résolution CM/ResDH(2013)95

Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia, A.S. contre la République slovaque

Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme

(Requête n

o

41262/05, arrêt du 26 juillet 2011, définitif le 26 octobre 2011)

(adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 29 mai 2013,

lors de la 1171e réunion des Délégués des Ministres)

Le Comité des Ministres, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention de sauvegarde des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, qui prévoit que le Comité surveille l’exécution des arrêts définitifs de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (ci-après nommées «

la Convention

» et «

la Cour

»),

Vu l’arrêt définitif qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité dans l’affaire ci-dessus et

la violation constatée

;

Rappelant l’obligation de l’Etat défendeur, en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe

1, de la Convention, de se conformer aux arrêts définitifs dans les litiges auxquels il est partie et que cette obligation implique, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour, l’adoption par les autorités de l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire

:

-

de mesures individuelles pour mettre fin aux violations constatées et en effacer les conséquences, dans la mesure du possible par

restitutio in integrum

;

et

-

de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;

Ayant invité le gouvernement de l’Etat défendeur à informer le Comité des mesures prises pour se conformer à l’obligation susmentionnée

;

Ayant examiné le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement indiquant les mesures adoptées afin d’exécuter l’arrêt et notant qu’aucune satisfaction équitable n’a été octroyée par la Cour dans la présente affaire

(voir document

DH-DD(2013)112

)

;

S’étant assuré que toutes les mesures requises par l’article 46, paragraphe 1, ont été adoptées,

DECLARE qu’il a rempli ses fonctions en vertu de l’article 46, paragraphe 2, de la Convention dans cette affaire

; et

DECIDE d’en clore l’examen.

Action report

Application No. 41262/05 Ringier Axel Springer Slovakia,a.s. v. Slovak Republic

judgment of 26/06/2011, final on 26/10/2011

(Anglais seulement)

Introductory case summary

This case concerns the violation of the freedom of speech guaranteed by Article 10 of the Convention. In its judgment the Court considered that it was crucial that the domestic courts make a careful assessment of the presence and level of public interest in the publishing of the impugned information in the present case as well as strike a balance between any such public interest and the individual interests of those concerned since, as a matter of principle, domestic courts are better equipped to establish the facts relevant to the ensuing legal analysis. This also applies to the issue of the bona fides of the applicant company’s legal predecessor and other aspects of the case that are necessary for establishing whether the applicant company’s legal predecessor had acted in accordance with the “duties and responsibilities” inherent in Article 10 § 2 of the Convention. The Court considered that by failing to examine these elements of the case, the domestic courts cannot be said to have “applied standards which were in conformity with the principles embodied in Article

10” and to have “based themselves on an

acceptable assessment of the relevant facts”. The foregoing considerations were sufficient to enable the Court to

conclude that the legal protection received by the applicant company’s legal predecessor at the domestic level was not compatible with the requirements of Article 10 of the Convention.

The applicant’s complaint concerning the violation of Article 6 § 1 was dismissed by the Court.

I.

Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

1) Just satisfaction

As the applicant did not submit a claim for just satisfaction, the Court considered that there is no call to award him any sum on that account (§ 121 of the judgment).

2) Individual measures

The applicant requested a reopening of the proceedings according Article 228 § 1 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The request was granted on 9 November 2011. The proceedings (registered under new file number 7C 251/2011)

are pending.

In conclusion, no other individual measures appear necessary.

II.

General measures

Publication and dissemination

The judgment was published in the Judicial Revue (

Justičná Revue

) No. 2/2012. The judgment has been sent by a

letter of the Minister of Justice of 19 March 2012 to the presidents of the regional courts with a

request to acquaint all regional and district court presidents with the judgment who then acquaint all district court judges with that judgment.

In conclusion, no other general measures appear necessary.

III.

Conclusions of the respondent State

The government considers that the Slovak Republic has thus complied with their obligations under Article

46

In Bratislava, 6 February 2013

Marica Pirošíková

Agent of the Slovak Republic

before the European Court of Human Righ