CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 4 avril 2018

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sCF71F55 { width:100%; border-collapse:collapse } .s829ABBD9 { border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-top:11.35pt; padding-bottom:10.98pt; vertical-align:middle } .s598389FB { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s3CC4D07E { font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s2D33099A { font-size:7.33pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s5FFF0A7F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:9pt } .s24AC208E { 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 } .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 } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-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 } .s40B7A780 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-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 } .s22F01CEB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-18pt } .s37D58556 { width:14.67pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sC83B07C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sCEF2C954 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } Resolution CM/ResDH(2018)143 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 18 cases against the Slovak Republic   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 April 2018 at the 1312 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 20986/10 FRANC 31/05/2012 31/05/2012 3817/07 PISKURA No. 2 16/10/2012 16/10/2012 11686/10 LADUNA 31/05/2012 31/05/2012 209/10 TRESA 02/10/2012 02/10/2012 15702/10 TNS S.R.O. 31/05/2012 31/05/2012 12583/09 HAUSER 05/02/2013 05/02/2013 13439/10 LADUNA No 2 02/10/2012 02/10/2012 23386/09 A.H. 19/02/2013 19/02/2013 59644/09 KRELA AND OTHERS 05/03/2013 05/03/2013 5718/10 LAUFIK 05/03/2013 05/03/2013 16111/11 FRIGO 08/10/2013 08/10/2013 43168/11 MAXIAN AND MAXIANOVÁ 07/01/2014 07/01/2014 74550/12 KUCEJOVÁ 26/11/2013 26/02/2014 25368/10 PALGUTOVÁ 19/02/2013 19/02/2013 32273/12 MAJTAN 19/07/2016 19/07/2016 12300/12 KESZELI 14/10/2014 14/10/2014 4603/11 CIRNEROVÁ AND OTHERS 27/06/2017 27/06/2017 65579/14 MAXIAN AND MAXIANOVÁ 20/12/2016 20/12/2016   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 judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee in these cases and to the violations established concerning the excessive length of civil proceedings (violations of Article 6, paragraph   1);   Recalling the respondent State’s obligation, under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention, to abide by all final judgments in cases to which it has been a 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 individual measures adopted in order to give effect to the judgments including the information provided regarding the payment of the just satisfaction awarded by the Court (see document DH-DD(2017)1375 );   Considering that the question of the individual measures has been resolved as the domestic judicial proceedings have come to an end or the authorities have adopted measures to accelerate the pending proceedings;   Recalling that the question of general measures required in response to the shortcomings found by the Court in these judgments is being examined within the framework of the group of cases Maxian and Maxianová (Application No. 44482/09) and that the closure of these cases therefore in no way prejudges the Committee’s evaluation of the general measures required;   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases as regards the individual measures and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof.