CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 5 mars 2020

.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 } .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 } .s189D71EE { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:14pt } .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 } .sA8507A40 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5A722CD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt } Resolution CM/ResDH(2020)40 Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights 11 cases against Slovak Republic   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 5 March 2020 at the 1369 th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     Application No. Case Judgment of Final on 30255/09 BITTÓ AND OTHERS 28/01/2014 07/07/2015 28/04/2014 07/10/2015 19294/07 KRAHULEC 05/07/2016 05/10/2016 23785/07 BUKOVČANOVÁ AND OTHERS 05/07/2016 05/10/2016 38082/07 RUDOLFER 05/07/2016 05/10/2016 44218/07+ RIEDEL AND OTHERS 10/01/2017 10/04/2017 62864/09 MEČIAR AND OTHERS 10/01/2017 10/04/2017 33076/10+ MATUSCHKA AND OTHERS 27/06/2017 27/06/2017 46609/13+ BAJZÍK AND OTHERS 27/06/2017 27/06/2017 47922/14+ DRAHOŠ AND OTHERS 09/01/2018 09/01/2018 51414/11+ BALAN AND OTHERS 27/06/2017 17/07/2018 27/06/2017 17/07/2018 2294/17+ KOŠŤÁL AND OTHERS 05/03/2019 03/12/2019 05/03/2019 03/12/2019   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 limitations on the use of the applicants’ property as a result of the application of the rent-control scheme (violations of Article 1, Protocol No. 1); Recalling that the Court observed that the authorities had taken measures providing for complete elimination of the effects of the rent-control scheme on flat owners only as from 2017 and that in order to provide for compensation for the period prior to the adoption of those measures, the respondent State was to introduce a specific compensatory remedy; 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 measures adopted 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(2020)49 );     Having noted during the execution process that the number of owners affected by the problems raised in the Bitto and others judgment was limited and that the European Court had ruled on their applications; having also noted in this regard the Government’s undertaking to explore all the possibilities of concluding a friendly settlement or of presenting a unilateral declaration, in conformity with the Court’s criteria, should, despite this finding, a similar application be brought before the European Court;   Noting therefore the authorities’ conclusion that, in the particular circumstances of these cases, the introduction of a specific compensatory remedy is no longer necessary, while regretting that they had not rapidly found a solution to compensate the owners concerned by the last five judgments of this group which could have been solved at the national level;   Having thus 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 these cases and   DECIDES to close the examination thereof.