BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Yetkinsekerci v the United Kingdom - 71841/01 [2009] ECHR 2256 (3 December 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/2256.html Cite as: [2009] ECHR 2256 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
Resolution
CM/ResDH(2009)1421
Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Yetkinsekerci against the United Kingdom
(Application No. 71841/01, judgment of 20 October 2005, final on 15 February 2006)
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 in this case, 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 concerns the excessive length of criminal proceedings (Article 6, paragraph 1) (see details in Appendix);
Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with the United Kingdom's 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;
Having satisfied itself that, the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction provided in the judgment (see details in Appendix),
Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded by the Court in its judgments, 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
- of general measures, preventing similar violations;
DECLARES, having examined the measures taken by the respondent state (see Appendix), 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(2009)142
Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Yetkinsekerci against the United Kingdom
Introductory case summary
This case concerns the excessive length of criminal proceedings, between 1997 and 2001 (lasting a little over three and a half years, of which the appeal stage lasted just under three years) (violation of Article 6§1). The delay at the Court of Appeal appeared to be due to isolated administrative problems.
I. Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures
Details of just satisfaction
|
Pecuniary damage |
Non-pecuniary damage |
Costs and expenses |
Total |
|
-- |
1 000 EUR |
-- |
1 000 EUR |
|
Paid with interest on 21/08/2006 |
|||
II. General measures
In view of the circumstances of the case the government has considered the following measures sufficient to implement this judgment:
- The judgment has been reported in the following case reports: The Times 12/11/2005 and All England Reporter [2005] All ER (D) 232 (Oct).
- The judgment has also been discussed in Halsburys Laws of England Constitutional Law and Human Rights as well as in Criminal Proceedings: Breach of “Reasonable Time Requirement” - Need for Alleged Remedy to be Clear, Justice of the Peace, Volume 169, Number 46, 12/11/2005.
- The staff of the Criminal Appeal Office were alerted by their managers to the judgment.
In addition, the government considers that sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998 provide an effective remedy in domestic law allowing complaints to be brought about the excessive length of judicial proceedings and adequate redress to be given. Here it should be recalled that public authorities are obliged, under Section 6 of that Act, to act in accordance with the Convention. If they were not to do so, their acts would be unlawful and the injured party could bring proceedings under Section 7 of the Act. By virtue of Section 8, a court may grant whatever remedies it considers just and appropriate, including damages.
III. Conclusions of the respondent state
The government considers that the measures will prevent similar violations and that the United Kingdom has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.
1 Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 3 December 2009 at the 1072nd meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies