CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 8 juillet 1994

.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 }                        EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS                          Application No. 19362/92                               Albert Heberger                                   against                                   Germany                          REPORT OF THE COMMISSION                          (adopted on 8 July 1994)                              TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                    Page   INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1   PART I   :   STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3   PART II :   SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3                                INTRODUCTION   1.     This Report relates to the application introduced under Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Albert Heberger against the Federal Republic of Germany on 11 November 1991.   It was registered on 16 January 1992 under file No. 19362/92.         The applicant was represented by Mr. H. Riedel, a lawyer practising in Frankfurt.   The Government of Germany were represented by their Agent, Mr. J. Meyer-Ladewig, Ministerialdirigent, Federal Ministry of Justice.   2.     The application relates to the applicant's complaint that he did not have a fair hearing, and could not exercise his defence rights, in respect of a German court decision imposing six days' imprisonment upon him for "an offence against the order in court".   On 3 December 1993 the Commission declared the application admissible.   3.     The Commission then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:         "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition referred to       it :         a.    it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts, undertake       together with the representatives of the parties an examination       of the petition and, if need be, an investigation, for the       effective conduct of which the States concerned shall furnish all       necessary facilities, after an exchange of views with the       Commission ;         b.    it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal of       the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly       settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human Rights       as defined in this Convention."   4.     The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 8 July 1994 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.         The following members were present when the Report was adopted :                    MM.   C.A. NØRGAARD, President                  S. TRECHSEL                  A. WEITZEL                  F. ERMACORA                  E. BUSUTTIL                  G. JÖRUNDSSON                  A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                  J.-C. SOYER                  H.G. SCHERMERS                  H. DANELIUS            Mrs.   G.H. THUNE            MM.    F. MARTINEZ                  C.L. ROZAKIS            Mrs.   J. LIDDY            MM.    L. LOUCAIDES                  J.-C. GEUS                  M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                  B. MARXER                  M.A. NOWICKI                  I. CABRAL BARRETO                  B. CONFORTI                  N. BRATZA                  I. BÉKÉS                  J. MUCHA                  E. KONSTANTINOV                  D. SVÁBY                                   PART I                           STATEMENT OF THE FACTS   5.     On 12 December 1990, in the context of criminal proceedings against third persons in which the applicant appeared as a witness, the Darmstadt Regional Court imposed a penalty of six days' imprisonment upon the applicant for improper behaviour in court (S. 178 para. 1 of the Court Organisation Act).   The decision was executed immediately, and the applicant served the penalty until 18 December 1990.   The applicant's appeal and his constitutional complaint remained unsuccessful.                                   PART II                              SOLUTION REACHED   6.     Following the decision on the admissibility of the application, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28   para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   7.     In accordance with the usual practice, the Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   8.     By letter of 29 June 1994, the respondent Government informed the Commission that they had agreed on the terms of a friendly settlement with the applicant, and submitted the following declaration:   <Translation>         "With a view to resolving Application No. 19362/92, lodged by the applicant with the European Commission of Human Rights, the parties agree to the following friendly settlement:         1.    The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will pay       to the applicant a sum amounting to a total of DEM 5,000 as       compensation for any possible claims relating to the present       application.         2.    The applicant declares his application to be settled, and       agrees that it should be struck out of the Commission's list of       cases.         3.    The applicant waives any further claims against the Federal       Republic of Germany or against a "Land" of the Federal Republic       of Germany in connection with the facts underlying the present       application."   <Original>         "Zur Erledigung der vom Beschwerdeführer bei der Europäischen Kommission für Menschenrechte anhängig gemachten Individualbeschwerde Nr. 19362/92 schließen die Parteien den folgenden Vergleich:         1.    Die Regierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zahlt dem       Beschwerdeführer als Ausgleich für sämtliche etwaige Ansprüche       im Zusammenhang mit der anhängigen Individualbeschwerde einen       Gesamtbetrag von DM 5.000.         2.    Der Beschwerdeführer erklärt die oben genannte Beschwerde       für erledigt und ist mit der Streichung aus dem Register durch       die Europäische Kommission für Menschenrechte einverstanden.         3.    Der Beschwerdeführer verzichtet auf die Geltendmachung       allfälliger weiterer Forderungen gegen die Bundesrepublik       Deutschland oder gegen ein Land der Bundesrepublik Deutschland       im Zusammenhang mit dem Sachverhalt, welcher der Beschwerde       zugrundeliegt."   9.     At its session on 8 July 1994, the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement. It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.   10.    For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.   Secretary to the Commission           President of the Commission         (H.C. KRÜGER)                         (C.A. NØRGAARD)