Lexploria

EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

SECOND CHAMBER

Application No. 22103/93

Sigurdur Georgsson

against

Iceland

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

(adopted on 15 April 1997)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

PART I : STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

PART II : SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

INTRODUCTION

1. This Report relates to the application introduced under

Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human

Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Sigurdur Georgsson against Iceland

on 3 May 1993. It was registered on 21 June 1993 under file

No. 22103/93.

2. The applicant was represented by Mr Magnús Thoroddsen, a lawyer

practising in Reykjavik.

3. The Government of Iceland were represented by their Agent,

Mr Thorsteinn Geirsson, Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice

and Ecclesiastical Affairs.

4. On 16 October 1996 the Commission (Second Chamber) declared the

application admissible in so far as it concerns the applicant's right

to freedom of expression. It then proceeded to carry out its task

under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:

5. "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition

referred to it:

a. it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts,

undertake together with the representatives of the parties

an examination of the petition and, if need be, an

investigation, for the effective conduct of which the

States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,

after an exchange of views with the Commission;

b. it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal

of the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly

settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human

Rights as defined in this Convention."

6. The Commission (Second Chamber) found that the parties had

reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 15 April 1997 it

adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of

the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of

the solution reached.

7. The following members were present when the Report was adopted:

Mrs. G.H. THUNE, President

MM. J.-C. GEUS

G. JÖRUNDSSON

A. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

J.-C. SOYER

H. DANELIUS

F. MARTINEZ

M.A. NOWICKI

I. CABRAL BARRETO

J. MUCHA

D. SVÁBY

P. LORENZEN

E. BIELIUNAS

E.A. ALKEMA

A. ARABADJIEV

PART I

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

8. The applicant is an Icelandic citizen, born in 1946 and resident

in Reykjavik. He is a lawyer by profession.

9. Following the publication of a newspaper article in which the

applicant had commented on a Probate Court judge's handling of a case

the Board of the Icelandic Bar Association decided, on 14 October 1992,

to admonish the applicant on account of certain of the applicant's

expressions in the newspaper article. The applicant appealed against

this decision to the Supreme Court which, by judgment of

17 December 1992, upheld the decision.

10. Before the Commission the applicant complained, under Article 10

of the Convention, that his right to freedom of expression had been

infringed in that he had been admonished for his comments quoted in the

newspaper article.

PART II

SOLUTION REACHED

11. Following the decision on the admissibility of the application,

the Commission (Second Chamber) placed itself at the disposal of the

parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance

with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties

to submit any proposals they wished to make.

12. In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary,

acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to

explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.

13. By letter of 6 December 1996 the parties indicated their

willingness, in principle, to reach a friendly settlement and by letter

of 2 April 1997 submitted a copy of the following settlement:

(Translation from Icelandic)

"We, the Government of Iceland and Mr Sigurdur Georgsson

hereby conclude the following

Settlement:

By a decision of the Board of the Icelandic Bar Association

rendered [14] October 1992, the Supreme Court lawyer

Mr Sigurdur Georgsson was admonished in accordance with

Article 18 of the Association's Code of Ethics and Section

8, subsection 3, of the Legal Representation Act, No.

61/1942, on account of statements quoted after him in the

weekly Pressan relating to the functions of

Mr Már Pétursson, district court judge, as a probate judge

in a certain case. Mr Georgsson appealed against the

admonition to the Supreme Court, which confirmed it, by

reference to the decision appealed from, in a judgment

rendered 17 December 1992. Mr Georgsson complained of this

to the European Commission of Human Rights on the grounds

that this had involved a violation of his freedom of

expression guaranteed in Article 10 of the European

Convention on Human Rights. In a letter dated

22 January 1997 the European Commission of Human Rights

proposed that the matter be settled by the Republic of

Iceland paying Mr Georgsson the equivalent of 5,000 French

Francs in addition to a reasonable amount on account of the

procedure before the Commission.

By reference to the above the Government of Iceland and

Mr Sigurdur Georgsson are in agreement to bring their

differences to a conclusion on the following terms:

1. That the Icelandic State Treasury reimburse

Mr Georgsson for the costs he has incurred in connection

with the case, ISK 510,990.-, and in addition pay him the

equivalent of French Francs 5,000, or ISK 62,905.-, cf. the

letter of the European Commission of Human Rights dated

22 January 1997, total ISK 573,895.-, wherein value added

tax on lawyer's fees is included.

2. That Mr Georgsson undertakes, following payment of the

stated amount and without being entitled to damages or

other payments from the Icelandic State Treasury, to revoke

his application to the European Commission of Human Rights

and not to take legal action against the Republic of

Iceland on account of the above matter before the courts of

Iceland or international tribunals.

The attitude of the Icelandic Government that the

provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights have

not been violated remains unchanged, and this Settlement

does not entail a recognition that such a violation has

taken place by the Republic of Iceland.

In signing this Settlement, Mr Sigurdur Georgsson

furthermore declares that he approves that this Settlement

be submitted to the European Commission of Human Rights in

confirmation of the fact that he revokes his application

against the Icelandic Government."

14. At its session on 15 April 1997, the Commission noted that the

parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.

It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the

Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured

on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.

15. For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.

M.-T. SCHOEPFER G.H. THUNE

Secretary President

to the Second Chamber of the Second Chamber

Menu

GEORGSSON v. ICELAND

GEORGSSON v. ICELAND

LEXI