Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights
Vokoun against the Czech Republic

(Application No. 20728/05, judgment of 3 July 2008, final on 3 October 2008)

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 concerns the infringement of the right to a fair, adversarial trial before the Constitutional Court (violation of Article 6§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 Czech Republic’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;

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(2010)15

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of
Vokoun against the Czech Republic

Introductory case summary

This case concerns a breach of the right to a fair and adversarial trial before the Constitutional Court in December 2004, in that the applicant did not receive a copy of the observations of the Supreme Court's judge concerning his constitutional appeal (violation of Article 6§1). 

I.	Payment of just satisfaction and individual measures

a)  Details of just satisfaction

In the proceedings before the Constitutional Court, the applicant complained solely of the lack of reasoning of the Supreme Court's decision on his appeal on points of law (lodged following civil proceedings in which he had unsuccessfully claimed recognition of his title to a property). The same complaint raised under Article 6§1 of the Convention, as well as a complaint lodged under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 were declared inadmissible by the European Court in its decision on partial admissibility.

The applicant requested compensation for pecuniary damage allegedly corresponding to the value of the property at issue. The European Court rejected this claim finding no causal link between the violation found and the applicant's claim for pecuniary damage. It also noted that it could not further speculate on what would have been the issue of the proceedings before the Constitutional Court should the latter have observed the requirements of Article 6, and concluded that the circumstances of the case did not allow it to regard the applicant as having suffered a loss of real opportunity. Furthermore, the European Court held that the finding of a violation was sufficient to redress any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant. 

b) Individual measures

The Czech authorities underlined that this case had been examined on the merits at least at first and second instances, that the same alleged violation of the Convention which the applicant had raised before the Constitutional Court had been declared manifestly ill-founded by the European Court. The applicant had made no claim in respect of individual measures. Consequently, no other individual measure seems necessary.

II.	General measures

 On 25/10/2005 the plenum of the Constitutional Court adopted a recommendation according to which reporting judges must communicate the observations of the opposing parties to the applicants for possible comments when they contain, or might contain new allegations, lines of argument or facts (see case of Milatová, final resolution ResDH(2006)71, adopted on 20/12/2006). 
The European Court's judgment was translated and published on the website of the Ministry of Justice (www.justice.cz) and it was also discussed at the meeting of the plenary of the Constitutional Court.

III.	Conclusions of the respondent state

The government considers that the measures adopted will prevent similar violations and that the Czech Republic has thus complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1 of the Convention.