CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 11 juin 2013

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sA64C57B1 { font-style:italic; text-decoration:underline } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s8567D65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-36pt } .s94DD5772 { width:32.67pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sF1E2154C { font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold } 1173rd meeting – 11-12 June 2013   Appendix 4 (Item H46-1)   Resolution CM/ResDH(2013)118 Handölsdalen Sami Village and others against Sweden Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights   (Application No. 39013/04, judgment of 30 March 2010, final on 30 June 2010)   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 11 June 2013 at the 1173rd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     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 final judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee in the above case and to the violation established;   Recalling the respondent State’s obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide to by all final judgments in cases to which it is party and that this obligation entails, over and above the payment of any sums awarded by the Court, the adoption by the authorities of the respondent State, where required:   -   of individual measures to put an end to violations established and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and -   of general measures preventing similar violations;   Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the above-mentioned obligation;   Having examined the action report provided by the government indicating the measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgment, including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court, (see document DH-DD(2013)589);   Having satisfied itself that all the measures required by Article 46, paragraph 1, have been adopted,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof. Action report concerning the case of Handölsdalen Sami village and others against Sweden (Application No. 39013/04)   The European Court of Human Rights delivered a judgment in the above-mentioned case on 30 March 2010. The Court found a violation of Article 6§1 of the Convention on account of the excessive length of domestic civil proceedings concerning land dispute, which began on 20 September 1990 and ended on 29 April 2004. It held that Sweden was to pay to the applicants €25   000 in respect of pecuniary damage, €14   000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage and €15 000 (including VAT) in respect of costs and expenses. Sweden was also to pay any tax that may be chargeable on the above amounts. The amounts were to be converted into Swedish kronor (SEK) at the rate applicable at the date of settlement. Payment was to be made within three months from the date on which the judgment became final in accordance with Article 44§2 of the Convention. The judgment became final on 4 October 2010.   The following measures have been taken as a result of the judgment.   Individual measures   The just satisfaction award of €25 000 in respect of pecuniary damage and €14 000 in respect of non ‑ pecuniary damage was paid by the government in equal parts to the four applicants on 23 December 2010 and evidence has been supplied.   With regard to the award for costs and expenses of €15 000, payment was made to three of the applicants on 30 December 2010. The payment to the fourth applicant was made on 28 April 2011, i.e. after the expiry of the time limit prescribed in the judgment, due to the applicant’s negligence in transmitting the necessary information concerning the bank account to use and despite regular reminders by the government to the applicant’s counsel. The government therefore holds that no default interest should be paid to the fourth applicant, whose counsel agreed with this conclusion.   No other individual measure is necessary since the proceedings in question are closed and the damage suffered by the applicants compensated.   General measures   The judgment of the Court has been published and disseminated. A report containing a summary of the judgment in Swedish, with copies of the judgment as well as the decision attached, has been sent to relevant domestic courts and authorities including the courts directly involved in the case, the Swedish National Courts Administration, the Bar Association, the Chancellor of Justice and the Parliamentary Ombudsmen. The judgment in English and a summary of it in Swedish has also been published on the Swedish National Courts Administration’s website www.domstol.se (see Nytt från Europadomstolen 4 2010), and the government’s human rights website www.manskligarattigheter.gov.se /www.humanrights.gov.se.   Summary   To conclude, the government holds that it has taken all the measures required as a result of the Court’s judgment in the present case and has thus complied with its obligations under Article   46§1 of the Convention. The government therefore looks forward to the Committee’s decision to close the examination of this case.