CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 12 novembre 1998

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sB51AFEB2 { margin-top:5pt; margin-bottom:10pt; font-size:10pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s262C0CB4 { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:10pt; font-size:10pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s35F1F2CB { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:10pt } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .s2CE7C1B9 { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt; font-style:italic } .s46AF7699 { margin-top:10pt; margin-bottom:5pt; font-size:10pt } Resolution DH   (98) 374 CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF 17 DECEMBER 1996 IN THE CASE OF DUCLOS AGAINST FRANCE (Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 12 November 1998 at the 647th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies) The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"), Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Duclos case delivered on 17 December 1996 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers; Recalling that the case originated in three applications (Nos. 20940/92, 20941/92 and 20942/92) against France, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 17 August, 29 September and 13 October 1992 under Article 25 of the Convention by Mr Alain Duclos, a French national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint relating to the excessive length of civil procedings; Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the French Government on 11   October   1995; Whereas in its judgment of 17 December 1996 the Court, unanimously: - held that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention; - held that the respondent State was to pay the applicant, within three months, 100 000 French francs in respect of non-pecuniary damage; - held that the respondent State was to pay the applicant, within three months 20 000 French francs in respect of costs and expenses; - held that simple interest at an annual rate of 6.65% should be payable on those sums from the expiry of the above-mentionned three months until settlement; - dismissed the remainder of the claim for just satisfaction; Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article   54 of the Convention; Having invited the government of the respondent State to inform it of the measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 17 December 1996, having regard to France’s obligation under Article   53 of the Convention to abide by it; Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent State accordingly indicated that the Court's judgment had been published in the Bulletin de la Cour de cassation (see Resolution DH (94) 24 adopted in the case of Kemmache) and sent out to the authorities directly concerned; Having satisfied itself that on 28 May 1997, the government of the respondent State paid the applicant the sum provided for in the judgment of 17 December 1996, and that the default interest due, that is 1 574.13 French francs was paid on 14 May 1998, Declares, after having taken note of the information supplied by the Government of France, that it has exercised its functions under Article 54 of the Convention in this case.