CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 28 janvier 1997

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s55D91DC7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; line-height:12pt } .sD8D566C3 { height:0pt; text-align:left; display:block; position:absolute; z-index:-1 } .s18312A14 { margin-top:89.5pt; margin-left:180.75pt; position:absolute } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5ABC7ADF { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; line-height:12pt } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s13F94BDE { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     RESOLUTION DH (97) 6 HUMAN RIGHTS   APPLICATION No.   17557/90 D.N. AGAINST FRANCE   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 28 January 1997 at the 582nd 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 11 January 1995 by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 15   November 1990 by Mr   D.N. against France (Application No.   17557/90);   Whereas on 21 February 1995 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 his application, as declared admissible by the Commission on 30   June 1993 (final decision as to the admissibility), the applicant, a transsexual, complained of the refusal of the French authorities to legally recognise his new sexual identity;   Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, by eight votes to five, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   8 of the Convention;   Whereas, at the 542nd meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission, held, by a decision adopted on 11 September 1995, having voted in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1, of the Convention, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 8 of the Convention;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 26 January 1996;   Whereas, at the 564th meeting of the Deputies, the Committee of Ministers held, by a decision adopted on 15 May 1996, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of France was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 50 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 30 000 French francs in respect of costs and expenses, namely a total sum of 80 000 French francs and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum at the statutory rate applicable on the date of this decision, it being understood that the interest would accrue from the expiry of the time-limit until full payment was placed at the disposal of the applicant;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of France to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 11 September 1995 and 15   May 1996, having regard to France's obligation under Article   32, paragraph   4, of the Convention to abide by them;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of France underlined that the present case was similar to the case of B. against France and that the reversal of the Court of Cassation's jurisprudence in 1992 (see Resolution DH (93) 52) would also prevent the repetition of the present violation of Article 8;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 18 July 1996, within the time-limit set, the Government of France paid the applicant the total sum of 80 000 French francs as just satisfaction,   Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention in this case;   Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the Commission in this case.