CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 26 février 2001

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s776E10E7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5C5E66B9 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-style:italic; vertical-align:super } .sFE832CA2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB20B16E1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s83BE5C30 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Final Resolution ResDH(2001)21 Human Rights Application No. 31806/96 Dimova against Bulgaria   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 26 February 2001 at the 741 st meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of former Article 32 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), Having regard to Interim Resolution DH (99) 351, adopted on 9 June 1999 in the case of Dimova against Bulgaria, in which the Committee of Ministers decided that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention on account of the fact that the applicant had no access to the Supreme Court since the latter wrongfully refused to examine her petition for review (cassation) in certain civil proceedings, and decided also decided to make public the report of the European Commission of Human Rights; 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 May 1999; Whereas at the 695 th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the Commission's proposals, held by a decision adopted on 14 February 2000, in accordance with former Article 32, paragraph 2, of the Convention, that the Government of the respondent State was to pay the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months, a global sum of 10 000 French francs, and that interest should be payable on any unpaid sum, calculated on the basis of each full elapsed month of delay 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 the respondent State to inform it of the measures taken following its decisions of 9 June 1999 and 14 February 2000, having regard to Bulgaria's obligation under former 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 the respondent State indicated that in view of the specific circumstances of the case, new similar violations of the Convention could be avoided through dissemination of the Commission's report to the Bulgarian Supreme Court, i.e. the only organ directly concerned by the violation found in this case: the Commission's report had accordingly been circulated to the judges of this court; Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that on 12 May 2000, within the time-limit set, the Government of the respondent State had paid the applicant the total sum of 10 000 French francs as just satisfaction, Declares, after having taken note of the measures taken by the Government of Bulgaria, that it has exercised its functions under former Article 32 of the Convention in this case.