CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 6 juin 2012

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sA427913 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s331C3E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sC83B07C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFB5BB313 { width:29.88pt; display:inline-block } .s2007D3CB { width:100%; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s91C0FD73 { width:19.74%; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .s563DAD69 { width:17.18%; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sDC4585C3 { width:22.92%; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFEA935CD { width:21.52%; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7658E112 { width:18.62%; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s49CD1423 { width:19.74%; border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .sA1B54B25 { width:17.18%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCD72BF88 { width:22.92%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s5AED371B { width:21.52%; border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s17E90AAF { width:18.62%; border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s347D1DBA { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2C0BCC49 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:9pt } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .sF66F4DA4 { width:23.21pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .s846B54EF { font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)86 [1]     Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Stamouli and others and Christodoulou against Greece   (Applications No. 1735/07, judgment of 28/05/2009, final on 28/08/2009 and No. 514/07, judgment of 16/07/2009, final on 16/10/2009)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;   Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern the lack of access to a court due to the application by the Court of Audit of a procedural rule no longer in force, resulting in annulment ipso jure of the proceedings that the applicants had initiated (violation of Article 6, paragraph 1) (see details in Appendix);   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgments;   Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent State paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the Christodoulou judgment (see details in Appendix),   Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent State, where appropriate, of - individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and   - general measures preventing similar violations;   DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent State (see Appendix), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.     Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2012)86   Information on the measures taken to comply with the judgments in the cases of Stamouli and others and Christodoulou against Greece     Introductory case summary   The cases concern the violation of the applicants’ right of access to a court due to the application by the Court of Audit in June 2006 of a procedural rule no longer in force (obligation to notify an appeal on points of law to the opponent party and file the certificate of notification to the Court’s Secretary within 6 months), resulting in annulment of the proceedings ipso jure and in the filing of their case in the archives (violations of Article 6§1). Although the rule in question had not been in force since 30/06/2003 (entry into force of a new Law No.   3160/2003), the Court of Audit applied it to the present cases on the grounds that the applicants’ appeal on points of law had been lodged before that date (see §§11 and 27 of the judgment).     I.   Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures   a) Details of just satisfaction   Name and application number Pecuniary damage Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Total Christodoulou - 10000 EUR 1217.50 EUR 11217.50 EUR Paid on 24/12/2009   b) Individual measures   The European Court awarded just satisfaction only in the Christodoulou case. A request for just satisfaction was not made in the Stamouli and others case. Reopening of proceedings before the Court of Audit following a judgment by the European Court is not provided by national law. Considering the nature of the violations and the fact that their cases had already been previously examined on the merits, the reopening of proceedings at issue does not appear an appropriate means of achieving the effective implementation of these judgments. In these cases, the aim of fully erasing the consequences of the violations found does not seem to prevail over the principle of legal certainty. Consequently, no other individual measure was considered necessary by the Committee of Ministers.     II.   General measures   The European Court’s judgments, translated into Greek, were disseminated, including to the Court of Audit. In these cases, the Court of Audit applied a provision that was no longer in force at the material time, on the grounds that the applicants’ appeal on points of law had been lodged before that date. The authorities indicated that the provision in question has not been applied since 30/06/2003 and that no similar complaints had been raised since.     III.   Conclusions of the respondent state   The government considers that the measures adopted have fully remedied the consequences for the applicants of the violation of the Convention found by the European Court in these cases, that these measures will prevent similar violations and that Greece has thus complied with its obligations under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.   [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 June 2012 at the 1144th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.