CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 26 avril 2007

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 96 April 2007 Gergely v. Romania - 57885/00 Judgment 26.4.2007 [Section III] Article 37 Article 37-1-c Continued examination not justified Burning of houses belonging to Roma villagers and authorities’ failure to prevent the attack and to carry out an adequate criminal investigation: struck out   [This summary also covers the Judgment of the case Kalanyos and Others v. Romania , no. 57884/00, 26 April 2007] Facts : The cases concern the burning of houses belonging to Roma villagers by local population, the poor living conditions of the victims and the authorities’ failure to prevent the attack and to carry out an adequate criminal investigation, depriving the applicants of their right to bring a civil action to establish liability and recover damages (see Information Note no. 75). Law : By unilateral declarations, the Government accepted that the events at issue had constituted violations of Articles   3, 6, 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention and undertook to pay each of the applicants EUR 30,000-36,500 in compensation as well as costs and expenses. They also undertook to adopt several general measures involving the judicial system, the educational, social and housing programmes and aimed at fighting discrimination against the Roma in the county concerned, stimulating their participation in the economic, social, educational, cultural and political life of the local community, supporting positives changes in public opinion in their respect, as well as preventing and solving conflicts likely to generate violence. The applicants requested the Court to dismiss the   Government’s proposals and to continue the examination of the merits of the cases. The Court noted that although the violations complained about were of a very serious and sensitive nature, they had already been exhaustively addressed in the case of Moldovan v. Romania ((no.   2) , nos.   41138/98 and 64320/01, Information Note no. 77). Moreover, the Government had acknowledged these violations and proposed several individual and general measures with a view to redressing the situation and to remedy the flaws in the judicial system.The implementation of the measures proposed in the   Moldovan case had already started under the supervision of the Committee of Ministers. Therefore, the Court did not address the allegations of their ineffectiveness, as their examination fell entirely to the Committee of Ministers within the execution proceedings. The Court was satisfied with both the general and individual measures proposed by the Government. Having regard to the nature of the Government’s admissions as well as the scope and extent of their various undertakings, together with the amount of compensation proposed, respect for human rights did not require the Court to continue the examination of the applications. Conclusion : struck out of the list of cases (unanimously).   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes