CEDH · PRESS;CHAMBERJUDGMENTS;ENG — 10 novembre 1999

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s23A41E03 { width:36pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sEDC5336B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sCB27B9E { width:16.66pt; display:inline-block } .sE4698C4F { width:35.05pt; display:inline-block } .s6442AFE5 { width:23.04pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS                                           10.11.1999   Press release issued by the Registrar   JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF ŠPAČEK, S.R.O. v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC     The European Court of Human Rights has delivered its first judgment [1] in a case brought against the Czech Republic, in the case Špaček v. the Czech Republic (application no.   26449/95, which concerns the imposition of additional income tax on the company Špaček, s.r.o.   The Court held unanimously that there had been no violation of the right to property, guaranteed under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights.   Summary of the facts   The case concerns an application brought by a limited liability company incorporated under Czech law which has its head office in Prague. In 1991 Špaček SW, the predecessor of the applicant company, maintained its accounts by single-entry book-keeping in accordance with the Private Business Activities Act and the Private Business Accounting Rules published in the Ministry of Finance’s Financial Bulletin No. 5. On 1 January 1992 Špaček SW passed to double-entry book-keeping. In November 1992 Špaček SW ceased to exist and the applicant company, Špaček, s.r.o. was incorporated. In April 1993 the applicant company was required to pay additional income tax of 385,600 korunas (CZK) including a penalty of 37,200 CZK, because Špaček SW had not increased the income tax base for the tax year 1991 as required by the regulations on the procedure for passing from single to double-entry book-keeping published in Financial Bulletin No. 6/7.   The applicant company alleged that the Czech authorities’ decisions to impose an additional tax of 385,600 CZK violated its right under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. Under these decisions, the applicant was allegedly obliged to comply with the Private Business Accounting Rules and the Regulations on the procedure for passing from single to double-entry book-keeping which were never published or announced in the Official Gazette, and which, it claims, never acquired the quality of a generally binding “law” within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.   Procedure   The application was lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 22 November 1994. On 14 October 1996 the Commission declared the case admissible. The Commission adopted a report on 15 April 1998 which expressed the opinion, by 27 votes to 2, there had been no violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. On 2 November 1998 the Commission decided to bring the application before the Court. A public hearing was held on 15 June 1999.   Composition of the Court   The case was heard by a Chamber composed as follows:   Jean-Paul Costa (French), President Pranas Kūris (Lithuanian), Françoise Tulkens (Belgian), Willi Fuhrmann (Austrian), Karel Jungwiert (Czech), Hanne Sophie Greve (Norwegian), Kristaq Traja (Albanian), Judges   and also Sally Dollé Section Registrar     ***   The full text of the judgment can be found on the Court’s Internet site: http://www.dhcour.coe.fr.     Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: (0)3 88 41 24 92) or:   Emma Hellyer (telephone: (0)3 90 21 42 15) Fax:   (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court.   [1] The judgment was notified in writing on 9 November 1999. It becomes final subject to Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention:   Under Article 43 , within three months from the date of the Chamber judgment, any party to the case may, in exceptional cases, request that the case be referred to the 17-member Grand Chamber of the Court.   A panel of five judges accepts the request if the case raises a serious question affecting the interpretation or application of the Convention or its Protocols, or a serious issue of general importance.   Under Article 44 , the Chamber judgment becomes final (a) when the parties declare that they will not request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber; or (b) three months after the date of the judgment, if reference of the case to the Grand Chamber has not been requested; or (c) when the panel of the Grand Chamber rejects the request to refer under Article 43.