AFFAIRE SUDA CONTRE LA REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2012) 18 [1] Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului Suda împotriva Republicii Cehe Comitetul miniștrilor, în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenția pentru apărarea drepturilor omului și a libertăților fundamentale, care prevede că el supraveghează executarea hotărârilor definitive ale Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (denumită în continuare "convenția" și "Curtea") [2] Având în vedere hotărârea de mai jos, care a fost transmisă de Curte Comitetului odată ce a devenit definitiv Numele cauzei (referitor la cerere) Hotărârea Determinativului Suda (1643/06) 28/10/2010 28/01/2011 Reamintind că constatările de încălcare făcute de Curte impun, pe lângă plata satisfacției echitabile acordate în hotărâri, adoptarea de către statul membru pârât, dacă este necesar, a unor măsuri individuale care să pună capăt încălcărilor și să șteargă, pe cât posibil, consecințele acestora pentru solicitant, precum și măsuri generale care să permită prevenirea unor încălcări similare; După ce a invitat autoritățile din statul membru în cauză să furnizeze un plan de acțiune privind măsurile propuse pentru executarea hotărârii; după ce a examinat, în conformitate cu normele Comitetului privind aplicarea articolului 46 alineatul (2) din convenție, bilanțul de acțiune furnizat de guvern (a se vedea bilanțul de acțiune, documentul DH-DD(2011)1023E [3] după ce a luat act de faptul că Statul pârât a plătit reclamantului satisfacția echitabilă prevăzută în hotărârea pronunțată; DECURSĂ că a îndeplinit funcțiile care îi revin în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenție în această cauză și DECIDE d In its judgment of 28 October 2010 the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, namely of the applicicants right of access to a court established by law, resulting from his obligation to submit is cearta to privatate arbitrators. The judgment became final on 28 January 2011 acording to Article 44 § 2 (b) of the Convention. The present report is intendented to information the Committee of Ministers about the individual and general measures of execution of the judgment. INDIVIDUAL Measures The Government consider that the Court.s judgment, raportd to a cearta between two privatate entities, does not require them to introducte any other individual measures going beyond the payment to the aplicant of just satisfaction awarded by the Court as reasums of costs and expenses. Acesta este un substitut al faptului că nu s-a ajuns la nicio concluzie că would emerge in cauzal connection with the violation found. Thus there seems to be no call for, e.g., reopening of the final decisions of domestic Courts in order to provide the aplicant with a fresh oportunity to initiate civil law procesedings dealing with the amount of compensation before ordinary domestics scurts. II. GENERAL Measures As already acknowledged by the Court in § 15 of the judgment, section 220k (1) was deleted from the Commercial Code as of 1 July 2008 by new Act no. 125/2008 (Companies and Cooperative Transformation Act) which does not contain any similar providing providing for arbitrators It follows that at at present, second of violation of the Convention similar to the present case is no longer. Therefore, no further systemic measures to prevent analogous in the viitoare are required. III. CONCLUZION The Government of the Czech Republic are of the opinie that they have taken all the measures of execution of the Court Praga, 16 September 2011. Vít A. Schorm Government Agent before the Court semnd Electronically [1]Adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 8 martie 2012 în cadrul celei de-a 1136-a reuniuni a delegaților miniștrilor. [2] A se vedea, de asemenea, recomandările adoptate de Comitetul de Miniștri în cadrul supravegherii hotărârilor Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului, în special Recomandarea nr. Rec.,2004)6 al Comitetului miniștrilor din statele membre privind îmbunătățirea căilor de atac interne. [3] Doar documentul în limba engleză

Résolution CM/ResDH(2012)18

[1]

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

Suda contre République tchèque

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

»)

[2]

,

Vu l’arrêt ci-dessous, qui a été transmis par la Cour au Comité une fois qu’il est devenu définitif

;

Nom de l’affaire (réf. requête)

Arrêt du

Définitif le

Suda (1643/06)

28/10/2010

28/01/2011

Rappelant que les constats de violation faits par la Cour exigent, outre le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée dans les arrêts, l’adoption par l’Etat défendeur, si nécessaire, de mesures individuelles mettant fin aux violations et effaçant autant que possible les conséquences de celles-ci pour le requérant, et de mesures générales permettant de prévenir des violations semblables ;

Ayant invité les autorités de l’Etat défendeur à fournir un plan d’action concernant les mesures proposées pour exécuter l’arrêt;

Ayant examiné, conformément aux Règles du Comité pour l’application de l’article 46, paragraphe

2, de la Convention, le bilan d’action fourni par le gouvernement (voir le bilan d’action, document

DH-DD(2011)1023E

[3]

)

;

Ayant noté que

l’Etat défendeur a versé au requérant la satisfaction équitable prévue dans l’arrêt ;

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.

Report of the Government of the Czech Republic

on the execution of judgment in case no. 1643/06 – Suda v. the Czech Republic

In its judgment of 28 October 2010 the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, namely of the applicant’s right of access to a court established by law, resulting from his obligation to submit his dispute to private arbitrators. The judgment became final on 28 January 2011 according to Article 44 § 2 (b) of the Convention. The present report is intended to inform the Committee of Ministers about the individual and general measures of execution of the judgment.

I.

INDIVIDUAL MEASURES

The Government consider that the Court’s judgment, related to a dispute between two private entities, does not require them to introduce any other individual measures going beyond the payment to the applicant of just satisfaction awarded by the Court as reimbursement of costs and expenses. This is supplemented by the fact that the Court did not find any damage that would emerge in causal connection with the violation found. Thus there seems to be no call for, e.g., reopening of the final decisions of domestic courts in order to provide the applicant with a fresh opportunity to initiate civil law proceedings dealing with the amount of compensation before ordinary domestic courts.

II.

GENERAL MEASURES

As already acknowledged by the Court in § 15 of the judgment, Section 220k (1) was deleted from the Commercial Code as of 1 July 2008 by new Act no. 125/2008 (Companies and Cooperatives Transformations Act) which does not contain any similar provision providing for arbitrators’ jurisdiction established by a contract between third parties in comparable situations. It follows that at present, occurrence of violation of the Convention similar to the present case is no longer possible. Therefore, no further systemic measures to prevent analogous violations in the future are required.

III.

CONCLUSION

The Government of the Czech Republic are of the opinion that they have taken all the measures of execution of the Court’s judgment in Suda v. the Czech Republic.

Prague, 16 September 2011.

Vít A. Schorm

Government Agent before the Court

signed electronically

[1]

Adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 8 mars 2012 lors de la 1136e réunion des Délégués des Ministres.

[2]

voir aussi les recommandations adoptées par le Comité des Ministres dans le cadre de la supervision des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme, et en particulier la Recommandation

Rec(2004)6 du Comité des Ministres aux Etats membres sur l'amélioration des recours internes.

[3]

Document en anglais uniquement