AFFAIRE STRÖMBLAD CONTRE LA SUÈDE

Rezoluția CM/ResDH(2013) 171 Strömblad/Suedia Executarea hotărârii Curții Europene a Drepturilor Omului (Recuperarea nr. 3684/07, Hotărârea din 5 aprilie 2012, definitivă la 5 iulie 2012) (adoptată de Comitetul de Miniștri la 11 septembrie 2013 cu ocazia celei de a 1177-a ședințe a delegaților miniștrilor) 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 judecătorești, inclusiv informațiile furnizate în ceea ce privește plata satisfacției echitabile acordate de Curte (a se vedea documentul DH-DD(2013)668), asigurându-se că au fost adoptate toate măsurile prevăzute la art. 46 alineatul (1), DECLAMENTUL pe care l-a îndeplinit în temeiul articolului 46 alineatul (2) din Convenție în această cauză și DECIDE d'en . Execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Action report Case of Strömblad v. Sweden Application No. 3684/07, judgment final on 5 July 2012 (numai în limba engleză) Case summary Case Case description The applicant in this case had applied for divort and initiated custody procesings before the Swedish District Court, after his wife had moved to the Czech Republic with their daughter born in August 2003. In an interim decision, the District Court granted the aplicant and his formation wife joint custody and gave the aplicant right of contact with his daughter. The custody procedings were pandanting before the national scurts for almost five years, before the District Court, in a final judgment, concluded that the applicant.s forme wife be granted que custody of the child. The Court found unanimously on thefacts that there had been a incalca of Article 8 of the Convention (right to family life) in the protracted custody procedeedings. The Court found by 5 voturi to 2 that there had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention in privince to the remainder of the application. The Court found unanimously that there was no need to examin the complaint under Article 13 of the Convention (right to an efectiv remedy). Individual measures Just: The just satisfaction award of €7 000 and the award for costs and expenses of € 3000 have been paid and evidence implored. Individual measures: The government considers no further individual measures are required. General Measures General Measures: Curtea a Uniunii Europene privind obligația unuider art. 8 of the Convention with the specialfacts of the case. Therefore, the government considers that no legislative or administrative measures are necessary. Publicație: The judgment and a summary in Swedish are publicsshed in the following location: the government rights website at http://www.manskligattigheter.se Disemination: the government has distributed the judgment to, inter alia , the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal of Skåne and Blekinge, the District Court in Kristianstad, the Supreme Administrative Court, the Administrative Court of Appeal of Gothenburg, the Malmö Administrative Court, the Swedish National Courts Administration, the parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice. The government considers it unnecessary to further disseminate the judgment. State of execution of judgment: the government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and that the case should be closed.

Résolution CM/ResDH(2013)171

Strömblad contre Suède

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

(Requête n

o

3684/07, arrêt du 5 avril 2012, définitif le 5 juillet 2012)

(adoptée par le Comité des Ministres le 11 septembre 2013,

lors de la 1177e 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, y compris les informations fournies en ce qui concerne le paiement de la satisfaction équitable octroyée par la Cour (voir document DH-DD(2013)668)

;

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.

Execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Action report

Case of Strömblad v. Sweden

Application No. 3684/07, judgment final on 5 July 2012

(anglais uniquement)

Case summary

1.

Case description

The applicant in this case had applied for divorce and initiated custody proceedings before the Swedish District Court, after his wife had moved to the Czech Republic with their daughter born in August 2003. In an interim decision, the District Court granted the applicant and his former wife joint custody and gave the applicant right of contact with his daughter. The custody proceedings were pending before the national courts for almost five years, before the District Court, in a final judgment, concluded that the applicant’s former wife be granted sole custody of the child.

The Court found unanimously on the facts that there had been a violation of Article 8 of the Convention (right to family life) in regard to the protracted custody proceedings. The Court found by 5 votes to 2 that there had been no violation of Article 8 of the Convention in regard to the remainder of the application. The Court found unanimously that there was no need to examine the complaint under Article 13 of the Convention (right to an effective remedy).

Individual measures

2.

Just satisfaction:

The just satisfaction award of €7 000 and the award for costs and expenses of €3 000 have been paid and evidence supplied.

3.

Individual measures:

The government considers no further individual measures are required.

General measures

4.

General measures:

The Court’s judgment related to the scope of Sweden’s positive obligation under Article 8 of the Convention with regard to the specific facts of the case. Therefore, the government considers that no legislative or administrative measures are necessary.

5.

Publication:

The judgment and a summary in Swedish are published in the following location:

The government’s human rights website at

http://www.manskligarattigheter.se

6.

Dissemination:

The government has distributed the judgment to,

inter alia

, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal of Skåne and Blekinge, the District Court in Kristianstad, the Supreme Administrative Court, the Administrative Court of Appeal of Gothenburg, the Malmö Administrative Court, the Swedish National Courts Administration, the parliamentary Ombudsman and the Chancellor of Justice.

The government considers it unnecessary to further disseminate the judgment.

7.

State of execution of judgment:

The government considers that all necessary measures have been taken and that the case should be closed.