CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;SCREENINGPANEL;ENG — 15 décembre 1995

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }         In the case of L. v. Finland (1),          The Screening Panel of the European Court of Human Rights, constituted in accordance with Article 48 para. 2 (art. 48-2) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") and Rule 26 of Rules of Court B (2), _______________ Notes by the Registrar   1.   The case is numbered 65/1995/571/657.   The first number is the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court in the relevant year (second number).   The last two numbers indicate the case's position on the list of cases referred to the Court since its creation and on the list of the corresponding originating applications to the Commission.   2.   Rules of Court B, which came into force on 2 October 1994, apply to all cases concerning the States bound by Protocol No. 9 (P9). _______________          Sitting in private at Strasbourg on 27 October and 24 November 1995, and composed of the following judges:          Mr Thór Vilhjálmsson, Chairman,        Mr F. Gölcüklü,        Mr R. Pekkanen,   and also of Mr H. Petzold, Registrar,          Having regard to the application against Finland lodged with the Court on 16 August 1995 by Mr L., a Swedish national, within the three-month period laid down by Article 32 para. 1 and Article 47 (art. 32-1, art. 47) of the Convention;          Whereas Finland has recognised the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court (Article 46 of the Convention) (art. 46) and ratified Protocol No. 9 (P9) to the Convention, Article 5 (P9-5) of which amends Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention so as to enable a person, non-governmental organisation or group of individuals having lodged a complaint with the European Commission of Human Rights ("the Commission") to refer the case to the Court;          Noting that the present case has not been referred to the Court by the Government of the respondent State or that of the Contracting State of which the applicant is a national or the Commission under Article 48 para. 1 (a), (b) or (d) (art. 48-1-a, art. 48-1-b, art. 48-1-d) of the Convention;          Having regard to the Commission's report of 5 April 1995 on the application (no. 18595/91) lodged with the Commission by Mr L. on 22 April 1991;          Whereas the applicant alleged breaches of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) (right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal) and Article 13 (art. 13) (right to an effective remedy) of the Convention, mainly on the grounds that the Finnish Land Court, owing to its composition, lacked the requisite impartiality in proceedings concerning the construction of a private forestry road crossing over his land; and that the proceedings before that court and other competent national authorities had been unfair in several respects;          Whereas the applicant further alleged breaches of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1) (right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions) and Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention referring to a number of matters regarding the implementation of the forestry road project and the relevant proceedings;          Whereas the applicant, in specifying the object of his application, as required by Rule 34 para. 1 (a) of Rules of Court B, stated that he sought a decision by the Court holding that there had been breaches of Articles 6 para. 1 and 13 (art. 6-1, art. 13) of the Convention and of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (P1-1);          Having regard to Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention and Rule 34 paras. 1 (a), 3 and 4 of Rules of Court B,   1.      Finds that      (a) the case raises no serious question affecting the        interpretation or application of the Convention and of        Protocol No. 1 (P1), in the light of the Court's case-law; and      (b) the case does not, for any other reason, warrant consideration        by the Court as, in the event of a finding that there has been        a breach of the Convention and/or Protocol No. 1 (P1), the        Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe can award the        applicant just satisfaction, having regard to any proposals        made by the Commission;   2.      Decides, therefore, unanimously, that the case will not be        considered by the Court.          Done in English and in French, and notified in writing on 15 December 1995 pursuant to Rule 34 para. 4 of Rules of Court B.   Signed: THÓR VILHJÁLMSSON         Chairman   Signed: Herbert PETZOLD         Registrar