CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 21 septembre 1994

.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 Van de Hurk case delivered on 19 April 1994 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;        Recalling that the case originated in an application against the Netherlands lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 1 December 1989 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by M. Cornelis Petrus Maria Van de Hurk, a Dutch national, and that the Commission has declared admissible the complaint that his case had not been dealt with by an "independent and impartial" tribunal since the Crown could decide that a judgment of the Industrial Appeals Tribunal should not be implemented or suspend its execution, as well as the complaint that he had not been afforded a fair hearing before the Industrial Appeals Tribunal;        Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 13 February 1993 and by the Government of the Netherlands on 11 March 1993;        Whereas in its judgment of 19 April 1994 the Court:        - held, by six votes to three, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), in that the applicant's civil rights and obligations had not been "determined" by a "tribunal" within the meaning of that provision;        - held, unanimously, that there had been no violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), as regards the requirements of fairness of proceedings;        - held, by eight votes to one, that the respondent state was to pay to the applicant, within three months, 35 000 Dutch guilders, together with any value-added tax which may be chargeable, in respect of costs and expenses, to which was to be added 6 336 French francs to be converted into Dutch currency at the rate of exchange applicable on the date of delivery of this judgment;        - dismissed, unanimously, 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 the Netherlands to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 19 April 1994, having regard to its obligation under Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;        Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the Netherlands gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;        Having satisfied itself that on 9 August 1994 the Government of the Netherlands has paid the applicant the sums provided for in the judgment of 19 April 1994, i.e. a total sum of 43 200 Dutch guilders,        Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of the Netherlands, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this case.                   Appendix to Resolution DH (94) 63      Information provided by the Government of the Netherlands        during the examination of the case of Van de Hurk                   by the Committee of Ministers        As stated in the judgment of the Court (see paragraph 39), the Industrial Appeals Act of 1954 (Wet Administratieve Rechtspraak Bedrijfsorganisatie) has been repealed as of 1 January 1994.        On that date a General Administrative Code (Algemene Wet Bestuursrecht) came into force, laying down new uniform rules of administrative-law procedure.   At the same time, the Industrial Appeals Act 1954 was replaced by the Industrial Organisation (Administrative Jurisdiction) Act (Wet Bestuursrechtspraak Bedrijfsorganisatie).   Under section 19 of that act, the new uniform rules laid down in the General Administrative Code also govern the procedure of the Tribunal.        There are no provisions in the new enactments similar to section 74 of the Industrial Appeals Act, 1954 and empowering an executive authority to interfere with the binding force of a judgment.        The Government of the Netherlands considers that the new legislation will prevent any repetition of the violation of the Convention found by the Court in the present case.