CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 2 juin 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s18158899 { width:4.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s8DB3563B { width:13.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sCCAE3A38 { width:24.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s1E4E3B1D { width:14.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s7FDD75C9 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; letter-spacing:-0.2pt; color:#474747 } .sBAAA7369 { width:16.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s8CEDB7CB { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:4.55pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-4.55pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sC7A06152 { width:12.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .sC39F4804 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#474747 } .sFAFB0546 { width:4.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s4F53E219 { width:13.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sC748F9AE { width:24.74%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s80D1569D { width:14.76%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s663F6F5D { width:16.06%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s26730A3B { width:12.34%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sB343B0AA { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#000000 }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 48294/18 Guðmundur Thor GUÐMUNDSSON against Iceland and 13 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 2   June 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli, President,   Andreas Zünd,   Mikhail Lobov, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having regard to the decision to grant the applicant in application no.   22796/19   anonymity, in accordance with Rule 47 § 4 of the Rules of the Court, Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the applications out of the list of cases, and the applicants’ replies to those declarations, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants and their representatives is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the right to a tribunal established by law were communicated to the Icelandic Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make unilateral declarations with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They further requested the Court to strike out the applications in accordance with Article   37 of the Convention. In the declarations, the Government acknowledged, with reference to the Court’s judgment in the case of Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v.   Iceland [GC], no. 26374/18, 1 December 2020, that the applicants’ right to be heard by a tribunal established by law, guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, had been violated, and undertook to pay them the amounts detailed in the appended table in respect of costs and expenses incurred in the proceedings before the Court. Moreover, the declarations noted the possibility for the applicants to apply to the Court on Reopening of Judicial Proceedings for the reopening of their cases, pursuant to Chapter XXIX of the Civil Procedure Act No. 91/1991, as amended by Act No. 47/2020, with respect to the twelfth applicant, and pursuant to Chapter XXXV of the Criminal Procedure Act No. 88/2008, as amended by Act No. 47/2020, with respect to other applicants. The applicants were sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declarations. By letters dated as shown in the appended table, the applicants indicated that they were not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declarations, finding them to insufficiently address the violations they had suffered. The Court observes that Article   37 §   1   (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if: “... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”. Thus, it may strike out applications under Article   37 §   1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicants wish the examination of the cases to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v.   Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no.   26307/95, §§   75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI). In Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson [GC], cited above, the Court has established general principles concerning complaints about the violation of the right to a fair trial by a tribunal established by law in the context of irregularities in the appointment of judges to the Court of Appeal. Moreover, its decisions in the cases of Friðjón Björgvin Gunnarsson v. Iceland (dec.), no. 48281/18, 2 June 2022, and Haukur Sigurbjörn Magnússon v.   Iceland (dec.), no. 6696/19, 2 June 2022, the Court accepted as satisfactory unilateral declarations identical to the ones submitted by the Government in the present case. With reference to this clear case-law concerning complaints relating to the right to a tribunal established by law, and noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declarations as well as the amounts proposed, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1   (c)). In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the applications (Article   37 §   1 in fine ). The Court considers that the amounts in the appended table should be converted into Icelandic krónur at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and paid within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision issued in accordance with Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within this period, simple interest shall be payable on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points. Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declarations, the applications may be restored to the list in accordance with Article   37 §   2 of the Convention (see Josipović v.   Serbia (dec.), no.   18369/07, 4   March 2008). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declarations and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article   37 §   1   (c) of the Convention. Done in English and notified in writing on 23 June 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Darian Pavli   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention (Tribunal established by law) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Year of birth   Representative’s name and location Date of receipt of Government’s declaration Date of receipt of applicant’s comments Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application (in euros) [1]     48294/18 04/10/2018 Guðmundur Thor GUÐMUNDSSON 1967 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     48300/18 04/10/2018 Sigurður Jóhann ÁRNASON 1982 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     48798/18 04/10/2018 Stefán Már GUÐFINNUSON 1989 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     49238/18 04/10/2018 Þór ELÍASSON BACHMANN 1983 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     6678/19 21/01/2019 Eldin SKOKO 1987 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     6681/19 21/01/2019 Ottó Örn ÞÓRÐARSON 1978 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     6699/19 21/01/2019 Karen Mjöll BJÖRGVINSDÓTTIR 1993 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     6713/19 21/01/2019 Fjölnir GUÐSTEINSSON 1992 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000     14307/19 05/03/2019 Pétur Axel PÉTURSSON 1980 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   16152/19 13/03/2019 Hlynur EYJÓLFSSON 1989 Jón Bjarni Kristjánsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   17300/19 21/03/2019 Viðar Már FRIĐFINNSSON 1963 Ólafur Valur Guðjónsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   22084/19 11/04/2019 Þórarinn JÓNASSON 1944 Björgvin Þorsteinsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   22796/19 12/04/2019 Anonymat N.A. 1980 Jóhannes Albert Sævarsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   36045/19 28/06/2019 Jens GUNNARSSON 1970 Vilhjálmur H. Vilhjalmsson Reykjavik 19/04/2021 26/05/2021 4,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant