CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 17 juin 2003

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } Resolution ResDH(2003)102 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 7 May 2002 (final on 7 August 2002) in the case of Ribes against France   (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 17 June 2003 at the 841st 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 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Ribes case delivered on 7   May   2002 and transmitted to the Committee of Ministers once it had become final under Articles 44 and 46 of the Convention;   Recalling that the case originated, on the one hand in an application (No. 41946/98) against France, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 23 October 1997 under former Article 25 of the Convention, and on the other hand in an application (No. 50586/99) against France, lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 21 August 1999 under Article 34 of the Convention ; that both applications had been lodged by Mr Jean-Marie and Mrs Marie-Antoinette Ribes, both French nationals ; and that the Court, seised of the application No. 41946/98 under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, joined it to the application No. 50586/99 in a decision of 11 July 2000 and declared admissible the complaint relating to the excessive length of two sets of proceedings concerning civil rights and obligations before the administrative courts;   Whereas in its judgment of 7 May 2002 the Court unanimously:   -   held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention;   -   held that the government of the respondent state was to pay to each of the applicants, within three months from the date at which the judgment became final, 6 000 euros in respect of non-pecuniary damage; 152,45   euros in respect of costs and expenses and that simple interest at an annual rate of 4,26% would be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;   -   dismissed the remainder of the applicants’ claim for just satisfaction;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article   46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 7 May 2002, having regard to France’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 indicated that the Court’s judgment had been sent out to the authorities directly concerned; Having satisfied itself that on 30 August 2002, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment of 7 May 2002,   Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.