CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 22 avril 1998

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s85436119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s837C0A3A { width:147.99pt; display:inline-block } .s45AE5F73 { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .sA694BA14 { width:175.1pt; display:inline-block } .sC63A23C4 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .s992D1D23 { width:169.32pt; display:inline-block } .sE833DBDD { width:133.92pt; display:inline-block } .s9BEEC2C1 { width:60.54pt; display:inline-block } .s22CB0842 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.15pt } .sB2B93316 { width:89.44pt; display:inline-block } .sC18989D6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s2EF16B1D { width:35.4pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s86550280 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:5.9pt; text-align:justify; font-size:13pt } .s2ED52ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:13pt }   RESOLUTION DH (98) 61   HUMAN RIGHTS   APPLICATION No.   19008/91   SERRIEN AGAINST BELGIUM     (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 22 April 1998,   at the 626th 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 22 February 1995, by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 of the Convention relating to the application lodged on 27 September 1991 by Marcel Odile Serrien against Belgium;   Whereas on 28 March 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 11   May 1994, the applicant complained of the excessive length of certain civil proceedings;   Whereas in its report the Commission expressed, unanimously, the opinion that there had been a violation of Article   6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;   Whereas, at the 542nd 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 decision adopted on 11 September 1995, that there had been in this case a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, 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, agreeing with the Commission’s proposals, held, by decision adopted on 15 May 1996, in accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of Belgium was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, 100 000 Belgian francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 100 000 Belgian francs in respect of costs and expenses, namely a total sum of 215 000 Belgian francs and that interest should be payable, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay (in accordance with the decision adopted by the Committee of Ministers at its 599th meeting (17 September 1997) on the general principles regarding the payment of default interest) 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 Belgium to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 11 September 1995 and 15   May 1996, having regard to Belgium’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 Belgium accordingly gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the Committee’s decisions; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;   Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 17 July 1996, within the time-limit set, the Government of Belgium paid the applicant the total sum of 215   000 Belgian francs as just satisfaction,   Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of Belgium, 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.   Appendix to Resolution DH (98) 61   Information provided by the Government of Belgium during the examination of the case of Serrien by the Committee of Ministers   The Government of Belgium has taken several important measures aimed at reducing the number of pending cases and preventing further backlogs of pending cases, thus improving effectiveness of Justice.   The Law of 3 August 1992, on organisation of the courts, allows in particular litigants to ask the judge to fix by a binding decision, at the beginning of the proceedings, the deadlines for filing their pleadings as well as the date of the hearing. By such provisions, it is hoped that proceedings will take place within a reasonable time.   On 29 February 1996, a Joint Declaration of Intent was signed in Brussels by judges, lawyers, registrars, clerks, bailiffs and the Ministry of Justice. This Declaration in particular sets up a systematic consultation among all the different professionals involved in the administration of justice in order to make it work faster.   The Law of 6 May 1997, aimed at accelerating proceedings before the Cour de cassation , has allowed the creation of legal secretaries, which prepare work for judges and prosecutors. This law also provides that the General Assembly of the Cour de cassation establishes and publishes an annual report of activities; examines every year, in September, the progress made with pending cases and reports on this subject to the Ministry of Justice and to the Parliament not later than 15 October; the General Assembly is moreover preparing a four-year plan containing the measures that, without affecting the exercise of its judicial functions, can contribute to reducing the quantity of cases still pending.   Finally, the report adopted by the Commission has been circulated to the courts concerned, according to the practice established by the Government of Belgium in similar cases.   The Government of Belgium is of the opinion that these measures will prevent the repetition of violations similar to the one found in the present case and that it has therefore exercised its functions under Article 32 of the Convention.