CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;EXECUTION;ENG — 20 juin 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 } .sFBC99493 { font-style:italic } .s7F74B77E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; font-size:12pt } .sF8AEFD1F { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4894483B { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:35.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sFB5BB313 { width:29.88pt; display:inline-block } .s49A78FE0 { width:26.55pt; display:inline-block } .sB2A0F2B6 { font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sF66F4DA4 { width:23.21pt; 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)87 [1]   Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Van Vlimmeren and Van Ilverenbeek against the Netherlands   (Application No. 25989/94, judgment of 26 September 2000)     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 “the Convention” and “the Court”),   Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it had become final;   Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case relates to the excessive length of certain proceedings before the civil courts (violation 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 the Netherlands’ obligation under Article   46, paragraph 1, of the Convention to abide by the judgment;   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;   Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires 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;   Whereas during the examination of this case by the Committee of Ministers, the attention of the government of the respondent state was drawn to civil proceedings still pending before domestic courts with a view to accelerating them,   DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix) and considering the decision taken at the 834th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies (24 April 2003), that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case and   DECIDES to close the examination of this case.   Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2007)87   Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of Van Vlimmeren and Van Ilverenbeek against the Netherlands     Introductory case summary   The case concerns the excessive length (more than 9 years) of certain proceedings before civil courts, seised under the Land Development Act, of a request for compensation for damages suffered by the applicants on account of regular flooding of their land.     In particular, the European Court noted that the domestic court examined the applicants’ claim more than five years after they filed their complaint in 1991. In fact, the Breda Regional Court, departing from earlier case ‑ law, considered that the applicants’ claims fell within the ambit of Article 212§1(b), sub-paragraph 4, of the Land Development Act ( Landinrichtingswet ), providing that the examination of compensation claims was possible only after a list of financial settlements had been deposited (violation of Article 6§1).   I.   Individual measures   Following the European Court’s judgment, the attention of the competent judicial authorities was drawn to the need to accelerate the proceedings in this case, so as to avoid any further delay. The Netherlands authorities confirmed that the proceedings at the origin of this case came to an end on 6   August 2003.   II.   General measures   Legislative amendments   The Dutch authorities underlined the isolated nature of the violation found in this case and indicated that, subsequent to the European Court’s judgment, a comprehensive legislative reform had modified, inter alia , the legislative provisions at issue in this case. The new provisions, which entered into force in 2006, provide henceforth that the courts may be directly seised of complaints similar to those at the origin of this case.   Publication   The judgment of the European Court has been published in Nederlands Juristen Blad , 24/011/2000, p. 2047. Furthermore, the Dutch authorities recalled that in addition to the publication in Nederlands Juristen Blad and Nederlands Jurisprudentie , all judgments of the European Court concerning the Netherlands are made public by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs through its yearly report to Parliament as well as by the Ministry of Justice through a newsletter addressed to the judiciary.   The government is of the opinion that, considering that the Convention has direct effect in Dutch law and that the domestic law should be interpreted in accordance with the judgments of the European Court (see Lala et Pelladoah, Resolutions DH(95)240 et DH(99)241), the authorities concerned will use their best endeavours to prevent the occurrence of violations similar to those found by the European Court in the present case.   III.   Conclusions of the respondent state   The government considers that the measures adopted have remedied the consequences for the applicants of the violations of the Convention found by the European Court in this case, that these measures will prevent new, similar violations and that the Netherlands have thus complied with their obligations under Article   46 paragraph 1 of the Convention. [1] Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 20 June 2007 at the 997th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.