CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 15 novembre 1996

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s4AB489F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:20pt } .sD8D566C3 { height:0pt; text-align:left; display:block; position:absolute; z-index:-1 } .sF60A7932 { margin-top:89.55pt; margin-left:180.8pt; position:absolute } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD227234A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .sF741ECC3 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s13F94BDE { font-family:Arial; letter-spacing:-0.1pt } .s1C40E3A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .s2EAAAA4F { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify } .sD9E934D1 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .s5D2B3044 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:5.5pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .s48BAB976 { margin-top:5.5pt; margin-bottom:5.5pt; text-align:justify; font-size:9pt } .sB90861A5 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic; letter-spacing:-0.1pt }   RESOLUTION DH (96) 675 CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF 8 JUNE 1995 IN THE CASE OF JAMIL AGAINST FRANCE (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 15 November 1996 at the 576th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies)   The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 of the Conven ­ tion 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 Jamil case delivered on 8 June 1996 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;   Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 15917/89) against France, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 13   November   1989 under Article   25 of the Convention by Mr Abdallah Jamil, a Brazilian national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint relating to the prolongation of the terms of imprisonment in default pursuant to a law enacted after the offence was committed;   Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission on 13   April 1994;   Whereas in its judgment of 8 June 1995 the Court unanimously:   – held that Article 7, paragraph 1, of the Convention was applicable in this case;   – held that there had been a breach of Article 7, paragraph 1, of the Convention;   – held that the finding of this breach constituted sufficient just satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained;   – held that the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months, 50 000 French francs for costs and expenses;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article   54 of the Convention;   Having invited the Government of France to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 8 June 1995, having regard to France's obligation under Article   53 of the Convention to abide by it;   Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of France gave the Committee information about the measures taken in consequence of the judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this resolution;   Whereas on 19 September 1995 the Commission seized the Court with a request for interpretation of the judgment of 10 February 1995 as regards the liability of attachment of the just satisfaction in the Allenet de Ribemont case which raises problems similar to those of the present case; on 7 August 1996 the Court delivered its judgment and rejected the request for interpretation while declaring that it had no jurisdiction to answer the first question put by the Commission and that it was unnecessary to answer the Commission's other two questions,   Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 of the Convention in this case.     Appendix to Resolution DH (96) 675   Information provided by the Government of France during the examination of the case of Jamil by the Committee of Ministers       According to the practice established by the Government of France in similar cases and in order to enable the courts to adapt their case-law to the Jamil case, this judgment has been published in the Bulletin d'information de la Cour de Cassation .   As to the payment of just satisfaction, the government specifies that the applicant did not serve any period of imprisonment under the warrant of committal for default after the sum of 6 000 French francs had been paid. However, the applicant still having an outstanding debt of 2 091 200 French francs, the amount of just satisfaction, namely 50   000 French francs for costs and expenses, has been seized by the customs authorities.