Sanchez Cardenas v Norway - 12148/03 [2010] ECHR 515 (4 March 2010)

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!

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 once it had become final;

Recalling that the violation of the Convention found by the Court in this case concerns the prejudice to the applicant’s honour and reputation and to his private and family life arising from suspicions expressed in a decision by a court hearing his application for visiting rights, to the effect that he had sexually abused one of his sons (violation Art.8) (see details in Appendix);

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform the Committee of the measures taken to comply with its 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, within the time-limit set, 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

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

The case concerns a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life due to the reasoning of a decision by the Gulating High Court in 2002, refusing his request for access to his two sons. The High Court referred in particular to certain evidence suggesting that he had abused one of his sons, but concluded that it was not necessary to go further into the question.

The European Court found that, although the interference was in accordance to law and pursued a legitimate aim (the protection of the rights of others), the relevant passage from the High Court’s judgment had not been sufficiently justified in the circumstances and had been disproportionate to the aims pursued. In the Court’s opinion, the domestic court should either have dealt with the issue of sexual abuse fully, by examining the evidence and coming to a reasoned conclusion, or left it apart. The inclusion of the passage in such an authoritative judicial decision had had a major impact on the honour and reputation of the applicant and had seriously prejudiced his private and family life (violation of Article 8).

The European Court acknowledged that the High Court’s decision on visiting rights had not been influenced by the inclusion of the contentious passage on the suspicions of sexual abuse (§33 of the judgment). It awarded just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage resulting from the prejudice to the applicant’s honour and reputation and to his private and family life. In these circumstances, no other individual measure appears necessary in this case.

Given the direct effect of the European Convention in Norway, publication and dissemination of the European Court’s judgment to all competent courts should be sufficient to guarantee that the requirements of the Convention and the case-law of the European Court will be taken into account in the future, to prevent similar violations. In this context, it should be noted that the National Court Administration sent the judgment of the European Court out to all courts. Judges have been provided with a copy of the judgment and a note containing a summary in Norwegian of the decision of the European Court. Moreover, new judges are subject to 20 days’ (mandatory) training. Half a day is dedicated to the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the Court, including the present judgment.

A summary of the judgment in Norwegian, with a link to the original judgment, was published on the Internet site Lovdata (<http://www.lovdata.no/avg/emdn/emdn-2003-012148-2-norge.html>). The Lovdata web site is widely used by all who practice law in Norway, civil servants, lawyers, prosecutors and judges alike. The Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (an independent national human rights institution) prepares summaries of the Court’s judgments for the database.

The government considers that no other individual measure appears necessary in this case, that the general measures taken will prevent other, similar violations, and that Norway has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.

1 Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 4 March 2010 at the 1078th meeting of the Ministers’ Deputies.

Pecuniary damage	Non-pecuniary damage	Costs and expenses	Total
-	7 000 euros	9 200 euros	16 200 euros
Paid on 13/02/2008

	[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Sanchez Cardenas v Norway - 12148/03 [2010] ECHR 515 (4 March 2010) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/515.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 515