CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 2 octobre 2000

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2E932ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:11pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s7F95B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:11pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     Resolution ResDH(2000)128 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 April 2000 in the case of I.S. against the Slovak Republic   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 October 2000 at the 721st meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocol No. 11 (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”), Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the I.S. case delivered on 4 April 2000 and transmitted on the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention; Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 25006/94) against the Slovak Republic, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 3 May 1994 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Mr I.S., a Slovak national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint relating to the excessive length of certain civil proceedings; Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the applicant under Protocol No. 9, on 4   February 1999; Whereas in its judgment of 4 April 2000 the Court held unanimously, that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention, and did not award any just satisfaction since the applicant had submitted no claim in this respect; Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of former Article   54 of the Convention which are, for the time being, applicable by analogy to cases under Article   46, paragraph 2, of the Convention as amended by Protocol No. 11; Having invited the Government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 4 April 2000, having regard to the Slovak Republic’s obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by it; Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the Government of the respondent State recalled that measures had already been taken to avoid new violations of the same kind as the one found in this case, notably through comprehensive measures of information and awareness raising of the courts concerning a previous similar case, Preložník against the Slovak Republic, and through various administrative measures adopted consequently by the presidents of several courts to improve their internal organisation (see Resolution DH (99) 551 in the Preložník case against the Slovak Republic), and indicated that the Court’s judgment had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned, Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of the Slovak Republic, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.