CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 25 octobre 1984

.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 } .s490C142E { width:28.91pt; display:inline-block }  The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),   Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention relating to the applications lodged by Mr Lars Bramelid and Mrs Anne Marie Malmström against Sweden (Applications Nos. 8588/79 and 8589/79);   Whereas on 3 February 1984 the Commission transmitted the said report to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;   Whereas in their applications introduced on 26 February 1979 the applicants complained that they had been compelled to surrender their shares for a price below their real value alleging a breach of Article 1 of the First Protocol (P1-1) to the Convention, that the arbitrators to whom their dispute was referred did not constitute a "tribunal" within the meaning of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention and that they were not afforded an effective remedy before a national authority alleging a breach of Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;   Whereas the Commission, after having declared the applications partly admissible, in its report adopted on 12 December 1983, examined whether the applicants' right under Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law was respected, and whether the applicants had an effective remedy before a national authority, as required by Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention, against the violations of the Convention that they allege;   Whereas in its report the Commission unanimously expressed the opinion that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention in so far as the applicants' case was not heard publicly by an independent and impartial tribunal and that it was not necessary to examine the applications under Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the Convention;   Whereas during the examination of this case, the Government of Sweden informed the Committee of Ministers that it accepted the report of the Commission in this case and that the Swedish Parliament had adopted an amendment to the legislation which had come into force on 1 July 1984 according to which a party not satisfied with a decision of the arbitrators could start a procedure before an ordinary court;   Noting with satisfaction that Sweden has already amended its legislation in this sense;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention,   a.   Decides that in this case there has been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;   b.   Decides, having regard to the information supplied by the Government of Sweden, that no further action is called for in this case.