CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 20 avril 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sDB9EB187 { font-weight:bold } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s2E520A3F { font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s589818D7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s100FA2D { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:18pt; font-size:12pt } .s5180A526 { width:29.33pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s24AC208E { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF004B676 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB2A0F2B6 { font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2342A031 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCC5122F2 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s347D1DBA { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6863D229 { width:26pt; display:inline-block } .s876D4AB2 { text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .s5BA4079A { width:22.66pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s23ADBB69 { font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)69 [1] Execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights Pramov and Neshev against Bulgaria   (Application No. 42986/98 and No. 40897/98, judgments of 30 September 2004 and of 28 October 2004, final on 30 December 2004 and on 28 January 2005)     The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the judgments transmitted by the Court to the Committee once they had become final;   Recalling that the violations of the Convention found by the Court in these cases concern the lack of access to a court to obtain a decision on the lawfulness of dismissals from the Bulgarian State Railways (violations of Article 6, paragraph 1) (see details in Appendix);   Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken in order to comply with Bulgaria’s obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgments;   Having examined the information provided by the government in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;   Having satisfied itself that, within the time-limit set, the respondent state paid the applicants the just satisfaction provided in the judgments (see details in Appendix),   Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of - individual measures to put an end to the violations and erase their consequences so as to achieve as far as possible restitutio in integrum ; and   - general measures preventing, similar violations;   Having examined the measures taken by the respondent state to that effect, the details of which appear in the Appendix,   DECLARES that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and DECIDES to close the examination of these cases.   Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)69   Information about the measures taken to comply with the judgments in the cases of Pramov and Neshev against Bulgaria   Introductory case summary   The cases concern the infringement of the applicants' right of access to a court to obtain a decision on the lawfulness of their dismissal from the Bulgarian State Railways in 1995 (violations of Article 6, paragraph 1). The European Court noted in this respect that at the material time a 1981 decree on the status of rail transport staff, which had legislative force, barred any access to a court in respect of dismissals from employment in the State Railways.   I.   Payments of just satisfaction and individual measures   a) Details of just satisfaction   Name and No. of application Pecuniary damage Non-pecuniary damage Costs and expenses Total Pramov 42986/98   - 2   000 euros 1   000 euros 3   000 euros Paid on 25/03/2005 Neshev 40897/98 - 1   000 euros 2   000 euros 3   000 euros Paid on 22/04/2005   b) Individual measures   The applicants had the possiblity of asking for the re-opening of the proceedings concerning their dismissals on the basis of Article 231, paragraph 1, letter “z” of the Code of Civil Procedure. According to this provision the interested party may ask for the reopening of proceedings terminated with a final decision when a judgment of the European Court found a violation of the Convention of Human Rights.   II.   General measures   1) Right of access to a court   The decree of 1981, refusing employees of Bulgarian State Railways any access to a court to obtain a decision on the lawfulness of their dismissal, was repealed by the new Rail Transport Law which came into effect on 1 January 2002. Industrial conflicts concerning railway employees are now subject to the ordinary provisions of the Labour Code, which provides judicial review in cases of dismissal (Article 344).   2) Time-limits for introducing a petition for review     In the Neshev case the European Court found that the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court, rejecting the applicant's petition for review as time-barred, was contrary to the principle of legal certainty, as the applicant could not have been aware that a decision had been given on his appeal in time to lodge his petition for review (paragraph 38 of the judgment).   The review procedure, as in force at the material time, was replaced in 1997 by a cassation procedure. According to Article 218b in conjunction with Article 197 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the time-limit for lodging a petition for cassation to the Supreme Court runs from the moment when the interested party is informed of the decision of the second instance.   3) Publication   The judgments of the European Court were published on the website of the Ministry of Justice www.mjeli.government.bg .     III.   Conclusion of the respondent state   The government considers that the general measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that Bulgaria has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46 paragraph 1, of the Convention.   [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 April 2007 at the 992nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies