CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 9 juin 1999

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9BD1BAAD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:22pt; text-align:center } .sFCACDBC6 { margin-top:22pt; margin-bottom:10pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sF5EDB7A { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:4pt; text-align:center } .s64EB5A6D { margin-top:4pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; line-height:150% } .s417B2516 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s810C3978 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:36pt } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     INTERIM resolution DH   (99) 354 HUMAN RIGHTS APPLICATIONS Nos. 26059/94 and 31404/96 POTIER AND COCQUEMPOT AGAINST FRANCE (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 9 June 1999 at the 672nd   meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article   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 on 21 October 1998 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the applications lodged on 25   August 1994 and on 28 March 1996 respectively by two French nationals, Mr   Gérard Potier and Mr   Paul Cocquempot, against France; Whereas on 25 November 1998 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, of the Convention has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article   48 of the Convention; Whereas in their applications, declared admissible by the Commission on 3 December 1997, the applicants complained of a lack of access to a tribunal and of the excessive length of two sets of proceedings combined with civil action for damages; Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   6, paragraph   1, of the Convention as regards the lack of access for the first applicant to a tribunal, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the length of the first set of proceedings, and that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the length of the second set of proceedings; Whereas at the 672nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and agreed with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 9 June 1999, that there had been in this case a violation of Article   6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the lack of access for the first applicant to a tribunal, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the length of the first set of proceedings, and that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention as regards the length of the second set of proceedings, Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case; Decides to pursue the examination of the present case, in accordance with Article   32 of the Convention with a view to adopting the final resolution.