CASE OF OLSSON AGAINST SWEDEN (No. 2)
Doc ref: 13441/87 • ECHR ID: 001-55563
Document date: January 26, 1993
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
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 Olsson (No. 2) case delivered on 27 November 1992
and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers;
Recalling that the case originated in an application against
Sweden lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on
23 October 1987 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention by
Mr Stig and Mrs Gun Olsson, Swedish nationals, who complained,
inter alia, of the restrictions on access imposed on them
concerning their children placed with foster parents and of the
absence of a court remedy to challenge the said restrictions;
Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the
Government of Sweden on 20 August 1991;
Whereas in its judgment of 27 November 1992 the Court:
- held by six votes to three that there had been no
violation of Article 8 (art. 8) in respect of the prohibition on
removal;
- held unanimously that there had been a violation of
Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention on account of the
restrictions on access imposed between 23 June 1987 and
1 July 1990;
- held by six votes to three that there had been no
violation of Article 8 (art. 8) on account of the restrictions
on access imposed after 1 July 1990;
- held unanimously that there had been a violation of
Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), in that no court remedy had
been available to challenge the restrictions on access imposed
between 23 June 1987 and 1 July 1990;
- held unanimously that there had been no violation of
Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), as regards any of the other
points raised by the applicants before the Commission and the
Court;
- held by seven votes to two that no separate issue arose
under Article 53 (art. 53);
- held unanimously that it was not necessary to examine the
other complaints, under Article 6, paragraph 1 and 13 (art. 6-1,
art. 13), which the applicants had made before the Commission but
had not reiterated before the Court;
- held unanimously that Sweden was to pay to the applicants
jointly, within three months, 50 000 Swedish crowns for
non-pecuniary damage, and, for legal fees and expenses,
55 000 Swedish crowns less 6 900 French francs to be converted
into Swedish crowns at the rate applicable on the date of
delivery of the present judgment;
- dismissed the remainder of the 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 Sweden to inform it of the
measures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of
27 November 1992, having regard to its 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 Sweden gave the Committee
information about the measures taken in consequence of the
judgment, which information appears in the appendix to this
resolution;
Having satisfied itself that the Government of Sweden has
paid the applicants the sums provided for in the judgment,
Declares, after having taken note of the information
supplied by the Government of Sweden, that it has exercised its
functions under Article 54 (art. 54) of the Convention in this
case.
Appendix to Resolution DH (93)3
Information provided by the Government of Sweden
during the examination of the Olsson case (No. 2)
by the Committee of Ministers
Sections 31 and 41 of the 1990 Act containing special
provisions on the care of young persons, already mentioned in
paragraphs 66 and 67 of the Court's judgment and in Resolution
DH (91) 14 of 6 June 1991 relating to the Court's judgment of
22 June 1989 in the Eriksson case, will ensure that in future the
violations of Articles 6 and 8 (art. 6, art. 8) of the Convention
found by the Court in the present case will not occur again.
The sums awarded to the applicants by way of just
satisfaction were paid on 23 December 1992.