Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2012)90 [1] Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului Lánchíd Hítel és Faktor Zrt. împotriva Ungariei (solicitarea nr. 40381/05, Hotărârea din 2 noiembrie 2010, definitivă la 2 februarie 2011) Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede că: Având în vedere hotărârea definitivă, care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului în cauza de mai sus și încălcarea constatată (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2012) 371E [2] care reamintește obligația statului pârât, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (3) (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 intergrom ; și măsuri generale pentru prevenirea unor încălcări similare ; invitând guvernul de la național pârât să informeze Comitetul cu privire la măsurile luate pentru a se conforma obligațiilor menționate anterior După examinarea bilanțului de acțiune furnizat de guvern care indică măsurile adoptate în vederea executării hotărârii judecătorești, inclusiv informațiile furnizate în ceea ce privește plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2012) 371E SÕ, asigurându-se că au fost adoptate toate măsurile prevăzute la art. 46 alineatul (1); DECLARĂ că își îndeplinește funcțiile în temeiul art. 46 alin. (2) din Convenție în această cauză și DECIDE d'în . Acțiune Report of 2 August 2011 App. No. 40381/05 Lánchíd Hitel és Faktor Zrt., judgment of 02/11/2010, final 02/02/2011 (Revised) Introductory case summary The applicant, Lánchíd Hitel és Faktor Zrt., is a Hungarian private limited company based în Budapesta. It complained that bject debts mails social security contributions affair. It linked in particular on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the convention. The Court conclused that no been struck between the cereds of the general interests of the comunity . There has acordingly been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures Details of just satisfacetion Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 29 April 2011 (pecuniary damage 310.000 €, costs and expenses 40.000 €). Therefore, considering the nature of the viols found in this case, and relevantfacts of the case, no special individual measures are necessary in the execution procesion. II. General Measures Legislation section 3(3) c) of the (Old) Taxation Order Act 1990 (nr. XCI of 1990) (as in force at the material time) provided that the Act was to be applicalied to the payment of social security contributions. Secțiunea 25(2) f) provided that, if a taxpayer failed to pay the tax and it could not be recovered from that taxpayer, the Tax Authority was entitled to the adoption of a decizie establishing vicarious liability to cover the outstanding debt. Secțiunile 6(1) și 6(2), 35(2)f) și 120(1) a) of the (New) Taxation Order Act 2003 (nr. XCII of 2003) contained identital rules. The interpretation that asignes could not claim in civil scurts outstanding impozits from those withvicarious liability was established by the Supreme Court in Uniformity Decision no. 2/2004.PJE. The legislation was subsequently repealed by Act no. LVI of 2005. According to the reasoning of the bill, the interpretation of the Supreme Court in Uniformity Decision no. 2/2004.PJE Therefore the legal avenue of a civil action was to be opened for the asignees of such claims versus those withvicarious liability, so as to restore constitution in terms of the right to access to a scurt in this context. Publication and disemination The judgment was publicished on the website of the Government (www.kormany.hu III. Concluzii of the responce state The Government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consecvences for the aplicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, that these measures will prevent similar viols and that Hungary has compliment with its obligations under Article 46 Paragraph 1 of the Convention. Budapest, 20 March 2012 Zoltan Tallódi Co-Agent of the Government of the Republic of Hungary [1] Adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 6 iunie 2012 în cadrul celei de-a 1144-a reuniuni a delegaților miniștrilor. [2] Doar în limba engleză
Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)90
[1]
Exécution de l’arrêt de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme
Lánchíd Hítel és Faktor Zrt. contre Hongrie
(Requête n
o
40381/05, arrêt du 2 novembre 2010, définitif le 2 février 2011)
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 qu’il 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 (voir document
)
[2]
;
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 intergrum
; 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 aux obligations susmentionnés
;
Ayant examiné le bilan d’action fourni par le Gouvernement indiquant les mesures adoptées afin d’exécuter l’arrêt y compris les informations fournies en ce qui concerne le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour (voir document
)
;
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 of 2 August 2011
Appl. No. 40381/05
Lánchíd Hitel és Faktor Zrt., judgment of 02/11/2010, final 02/02/2011
(Revised)
Introductory case summary
The applicant, Lánchíd Hitel és Faktor Zrt., is a Hungarian private limited company based
in Budapest. It complained that certain debts – in particular social security contributions –
which had been assigned by the tax authorities in 2001 and 2002 were declared non-
enforceable by the Hungarian courts. It relied in particular on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (protection of property) to the Convention. The Court concluded that no “fair balance” has
been struck between the demands of the general interests of the community – namely, the
integrity of the treasury – and the requirements of the individual’s fundamental rights.
There has accordingly been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
I.
Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
Details of just satisfaction
Just satisfaction rewarded to the applicant was paid on 29 April 2011 (pecuniary damage 310.000 €, costs and expenses 40.000 €). Therefore, considering the nature of the violations found in this case, and relevant facts of the case, no special individual measures are necessary in the execution process.
II.
General measures
a)
Legislation
Section 3(3) c) of the (Old) Taxation Order Act 1990 (no. XCI of 1990) (as in force at the material time) provided that the Act was to be applied to the payment of social security contributions. Section 25(2) f) provided that, if a taxpayer failed to pay the tax and it could not be recovered from that taxpayer, the Tax Authority was entitled to the adoption of a decision establishing vicarious liability to cover the outstanding debt. Sections 6(1) and 6(2), 35(2)f) and 120(1)a) of the (New) Taxation Order Act 2003 (no. XCII of 2003) contained identical rules.
The interpretation that assignees could not claim in civil courts outstanding taxes from those with vicarious liability was established by the Supreme Court in Uniformity Decision no. 2/2004.PJE.
The legislation was subsequently repealed by Act no. LVI of 2005. According to the reasoning of the bill, the interpretation of the Supreme Court in Uniformity Decision no. 2/2004.PJE – an economically unjustified misconception of the law running counter to the intentions of the lawmaker – rendered unenforceable and thus worthless those tax debts which could not be recovered in the liquidation of the original debtors. Therefore the legal avenue of a civil action was to be opened for the assignees of such claims vis-à-vis those with vicarious liability, so as to restore constitutionality in terms of the right to access to a court in this context.
b)
Publication and dissemination
The judgment was published on the website of the Government (
www.kormany.hu
).
III.
Con
clusions of the respondent state
The Government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences
for the applicant of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case, that these
measures will prevent similar violations and that Hungary has thus complied with its
obligations under Article 46, Paragraph 1 of the Convention.
Budapest, 20 March 2012
Zoltân Tallódi
Co-Agent of the Government of the Republic of Hungary
[1]
Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 6 juin 2012 lors de la 1144e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.
[2]
document en anglais uniquement