Search
document

Document text Analytics

CASE OF RUIZ-MATEOS AGAINST SPAIN

Doc ref: 12952/87 • ECHR ID: 001-55610

Document date: March 21, 1994

Inbound citations: 6
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 0

CASE OF RUIZ-MATEOS AGAINST SPAIN

Doc ref: 12952/87 • ECHR ID: 001-55610

Document date: March 21, 1994

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 54

(art. 54) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights

and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the

Convention"),

Having regard to the judgment of the European Court of Human

Rights in the case of Ruiz-Mateos against Spain delivered on

23 June 1993 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of

Ministers;

Recalling that the case originated in an application against

Spain lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on

5 May 1987 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by six

Spanish nationals, Mr José María, Mr Zoilo, Mr Rafael,

Mr Isidoro, Mr Alfonso and Mrs María Dolores Ruiz-Mateos who

complained, inter alia, that their actions for the restitution

of their assets were not heard within a reasonable time and that

the proceedings before the Constitutional Court did not comply

with the principle of equality of arms;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the

Government of Spain on 20 February 1992 and by the Commission on

21 February 1992;

Whereas in its judgment of 23 June 1993 the Court:

- held by twenty-two votes to two that there had been a

violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), as regards the

length of the proceedings;

- held by eighteen votes to six that there had been a

violation of that provision as regards the fairness of the

proceedings conducted in this case in the Constitutional Court;

- dismissed unanimously the applicants' claim for just

satisfaction;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of

Ministers concerning the application of Article 54 (art. 54) of

the Convention;

Having invited the Government of Spain to inform it of the

measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of

23 June 1993, having regard to Spain's obligation under

Article 53 (art. 53) of the Convention to abide by it;

Whereas, during the examination of the case by the Committee

of Ministers, the Government of Spain gave the Committee

information about the measures taken in consequence of the

judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this

resolution,

Declares, after having taken note of the information

supplied by the Government of Spain, that it has exercised its

functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this

case.

Appendix to Resolution DH (94) 27

Information provided by the Government of Spain

during the examination of the case of Ruiz-Mateos against

Spain by the Committee of Ministers

The legislation at issue in the Ruiz-Mateos case,

Act No. 7/1983 dated 29 June 1983 concerning the expropriation

on the grounds of public utility and social interest of firms

belonging to the RUMASA group, was unique and the Ruiz-Mateos

case was, accordingly, an exceptional case.

The judgment of the Court has received the widest possible

publicity in Spain, including extensive reports in mass media.

The violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), which

resulted from excessive length of the domestic proceedings, has

been remedied by the developments which have since taken place

in Spain: as far as the situation before the Audiencia Provincial

is concerned, this appears already from paragraph 48 of the

Court's judgment; as regards the situation before the

Constitutional Court, statistics show that the workload of this

Court decreased considerably after 1986 as a result of the

maturing of the Spanish democracy, a clearer legal situation, in

particular as far as the distribution of competences within the

new State of the Autonomous Regions (el nuevo Estado de las

Autonomías) is concerned, and the adoption of the constitutional

amendment (ley orgánica) 6/1988, of 9 June 1988, which allowed

the Constitutional Court to reject inadmissible amparo appeals

by means of a summary procedure.

In view of the unique character of the Ruiz-Mateos case, the

violation of the same article which resulted from the fact that

the applicants were not allowed to participate in the proceedings

before the Constitutional Court will also not reoccur. In the

unlikely event of a new case, comparable to that of the

Ruiz-Mateos case, the Constitutional Court would be empowered by

Article 96 of the Spanish Constitution to adopt a procedure

complying with the requirements of the Convention as laid down

in the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the

Ruiz-Mateos case; considering the status of the Convention in

Spanish law there is also every reason to believe that, in such

a case, the Constitutional Court would adopt such a procedure.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant