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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s2DAC2ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:18pt } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { 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 } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sF004B676 { 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 } .sB30C44B0 { 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 } .s2342A031 { 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 } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s3985515B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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)89 [1]     Execution of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights 26 cases against Hungary   Case, Application No. Date of decision Balint Toth, application No 60380/08 29/03/2011 Balogh and Rafael, application No 44062/08 10/05/2011 Bard, application No 14134/06 09/11/2010 Betty Bau KFT, application No 57119/10 10/05/2011 Boly Es Videke Takarekszovetkezet, application No 39870/07 18/01/2011 Brezovszki, application No 46959/08 15/03/2011 Farkasne Furulyas, application No 24767/08 15/03/2011 Futura Plusz Kft., application No 39864/08 30/08/2011 Jozsef and Jozsefne Kovacs, application No 8666/08 13/09/2011 Kiraly, application No 53402/07 15/03/2011 Kocsis, application No 12926/08 15/03/2011 Kollar, application No 32251/08 13/09/2011 Kormanik, application No 37905/08 29/03/2011 Laszlone Fodor, application No 52355/07 28/09/2010 Ledniczky, application No 11124/08 15/03/2011 Matusichne Vizvari, application No 8232/07 14/12/2010 Palasthy, application No 39508/10 15/03/2011 Pappne Takacs, application No 49392/07 28/09/2010 Polinger, application No 49153/07 18/01/2011 Prohaszka, application No 19029/08 10/05/2011 Rosta, application No 19049/08 15/03/2011 Seres and Szikora, application No 54421/08 24/05/2011 Szabone Pakozdi, application No 931/08 29/03/2011 Szentivanszki, application No 23374/07 12/10/2010 Tatay, application No 39449/08 29/03/2011 Tisza-Tavi Kft., application No 49962/08 13/09/2011   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 39, paragraph 4, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of friendly settlements as they appear in decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”);   Considering that in these cases the Court, having taken formal note of friendly settlements reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicants, and having been satisfied that the settlements were based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols, decided, unanimously, to strike these cases out of its list;   Having satisfied itself that the terms of the friendly-settlements were executed by the respondent State,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 39, paragraph 4, of the Convention and   DECIDES to close their examination.     [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 6 June 2012 at the 1144th Meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.