CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 19 septembre 1989

.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 }  The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),   Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Neves e Silva case, delivered on 27 April 1989 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case originated in an application against Portugal lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 17 October 1984 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by Mr José Neves e Silva, a Portuguese national, who complained that the length of proceedings brought by him before the administrative courts was not "reasonable" within the meaning of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;   Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 14 March 1988 and by the Government of Portugal on 11 April 1988;   Whereas in its judgment of 27 April 1989 the Court unanimously:   -        held that there had been a breach of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the Convention;   -        held that the respondent State was to pay to the applicant 500 000 escudos in respect of non-pecuniary damage and 400 000 escudos in respect of costs and expenses;   -        dismissed the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention;   Having invited the Government of Portugal to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;   Having satisfied itself that the Government of Portugal has paid to the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment,   Declares that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.