CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 27 mai 1991

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                        Application No. 13425/87                       by Bernt MATTSSON                       against Sweden             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 27 May 1991, the following members being present:                 MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President                   J.A. FROWEIN                   S. TRECHSEL                   E. BUSUTTIL                   A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   J.-C. SOYER                   H.G. SCHERMERS                   H. DANELIUS              Sir   Basil HALL              MM.   F. MARTINEZ RUIZ                   C.L. ROZAKIS              Mrs.   J. LIDDY              MM.   L. LOUCAIDES                   J.-C. GEUS                   A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO                   M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                   B. MARXER                Mr.   H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;           Having regard to the application introduced on 20 August 1987 by Bernt Mattsson against Sweden and registered on 30 November 1987 under file No. 13425/87;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:   THE FACTS           The applicant is a Swedish citizen, born in 1918 and resident at Huddinge.   Before the Commission he is represented by Mr.   Bo Forsberg, a lawyer practising at Huddinge.           The applicant owns half of a property, Förslöv 25:3, situated at Båstad.           The applicant asked the Building Committee (byggnadsnämnden) of Båstad for a permit to use one of the three houses on the property, an out-house, for permanent residence and for a permit to change the shape of some windows of that house.           On 16 September 1985, the Building Committee rejected the application.   The applicant appealed to the County Administrative Board (länsstyrelsen) of the Kristianstad County.   On 8 July 1986 the County Administrative Board rejected the appeal.           The applicant appealed to the Government (the Ministry of Housing) contending inter alia that the restrictions on his personal freedom which he had suffered as a result of the decision of the County Administrative Board violated the European Convention on Human Rights.   He further submitted that the Building Committee had exceeded its competence, that his individual interests should be taken into account and that the permit was important for him and his family.           On 5 March 1987, the Government rejected the appeal finding no special reasons to grant exemption from the prohibition against urban development.           Before the Commission the applicant complained that, since the Government's decision cannot be challenged before a court, there has been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention.   He also referred to his rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention in so far as he had been refused permission to make alterations to his house.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION           The application was introduced on 20 August 1987 and registered on 30 November 1987.           On 2 May 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government without inviting them to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application, and to adjourn further examination of the case until the European Court of Human Rights had delivered judgment in the Skärby case.   On 28 June 1990 the Court delivered judgment in that case (Eur.   Court H.R., Skärby judgment of 28 June 1990, Series A no. 180-B).           On 13 July 1990 the Commission invited the respondent Government to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application.           The Government's observations were submitted on 22 October 1990.   No observations in reply from the applicant were received.           On 11 April 1991 the Government informed the Commission that a settlement had been reached and enclosed a copy of this settlement which reads as follows:                               "SETTLEMENT             On 20 August 1987, Mr.   Bernt Mattsson introduced an application with the European Commission of Human Rights.   It was registered under No. 13425/87.   After having been invited to submit its written observations on the admissibility and merits of the application the Government, by letter of 22 October 1990, waived objections against the admissibility with regard to the complaints under Article 6 and admitted that there had been a violation of that Article.           The Government and the applicant have now reached the following friendly settlement on the basis of respect for human rights as defined in the Convention in order to terminate the proceedings before the Commission.   a)       The Government will pay the sum of SEK 15.000 to the         applicant, including legal costs.   b)       The applicant declares that he has no further claims in         the matter.   c)       The parties agree that the application is struck off the         Commission's list of cases.                   This settlement is dependent upon the formal approval of the Government.     Stockholm 27 February 1991                  Stockholm 19 March 1991       (signed)                                    (signed)   Carl Henrik Ehrenkrona                      Bo Forsberg Agent of the Swedish                        Counsel for the Government                                  applicant"               The settlement was approved by the Government on 4 April 1991.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION           Having regard to Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention, the Commission notes that the matter has been resolved.   Furthermore, it finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application.           For these reasons, the Commission unanimously             DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF THE LIST OF CASES.       Secretary to the Commission                President of the Commission             (H. C. KRUGER)                               (C. A. NØRGAARD)