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)117 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 5 February 2002 (Friendly settlement) in the case of Matthies-Lenzen against Luxembourg   (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 final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Matthies-Lenzen case delivered on 5 February 2002 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;   Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 45165/99) against Luxembourg, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 19 August 1998 under former Article 25 of the Convention by Ms   Doris   Matthies-Lenzen and Mr Götz Matthies, German nationals, and that the Court, seised of the case under Article 5, paragraph 2, of Protocol No. 11, declared admissible their complaints concerning the excessive length of certain criminal proceedings combined with civil action for damages and the lack of effective remedy in this respect;   Whereas in its judgment of 5 February 2002 the Court, after having taken formal note of a friendly settlement reached by the government of the respondent state and the applicants, and having been satisfied that the settlement was based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols, decided unanimously to strike the case out of its list and took note of the parties’ undertaking not to request a re-hearing of the case before the Grand Chamber;   Whereas under the above-mentioned friendly settlement it was agreed that the Government of Luxembourg would pay the applicants, the sum of 550 000 Luxembourg francs, in respect of non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, within three months as from the notification of the judgment;   Recalling that Rule 44, paragraph 2, of the Rules of the Court provides that the striking-out of a case shall be effected by means of a judgment which the President shall forward to the Committee of Ministers once it has become final in order to allow it to supervise, in accordance with Article 46, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the execution of any undertakings which may have been attached to the discontinuance or solution of the matter;   Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Recalling that the Luxembourg Government considered that Article 1 of 1 September 1998 on the civil responsibilities of the state and of public authorities offered an effective remedy, both legally and practically, in respect of the violation of Article 13 and that no other measure was required in the present case to conform to the Court’s judgment; Having satisfied itself that on 27 February 2002, within the time-limit agreed to under the terms of the friendly settlement, the government of the respondent state had paid the applicants the sum provided for in the friendly settlement,   Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of Luxembourg, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.