Search
document

Document text Analytics

ERIKSSON CASE

Doc ref: 11373/85 • ECHR ID: 001-55510

Document date: June 6, 1991

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

ERIKSSON CASE

Doc ref: 11373/85 • ECHR ID: 001-55510

Document date: June 6, 1991

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 Eriksson case delivered on 22 June 1989 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 7 December 1984 under Article 25 (art. 25) of the

Convention by Mrs Cecilia Eriksson, a Swedish national, acting

on behalf of herself and of her daughter Lisa, who complained

inter alia of prohibitions on removal of her daughter from her

foster home after public care had terminated and of restrictions

on their access to each other. The applicant also complained

that no court remedy was available to challenge these

restrictions on access;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by

the Commission on 13 September 1988 and by the Government of

Sweden on 8 November 1988;

Whereas in its judgment of 22 June 1989 the Court:

- held unanimously that the severe and lasting restrictions

on access imposed on the applicants without any basis in

domestic law, combined with the long duration of the

prohibition on removal, amounted to a violation of

Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention;

- held unanimously that the lack of a court remedy to

challenge the restrictions on access gave rise to a

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

Convention, as regards Cecilia Eriksson and, by fifteen

votes to five, as regards Lisa Eriksson;

- held unanimously that, as regards both applicants, it was

not necessary to examine this same point also under

Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;

- held unanimously that there had been no other violations

of Article 6, paragraph l (art. 6-1);

- held unanimously that there had been no violation of

Cecilia Eriksson's rights under Article 2 of Protocol

No. l (P1-2), taken alone or together with Article 13

(art. 13+P1-2) of the Convention;

- held unanimously that Lisa Eriksson could not claim to

be a victim of the alleged violation of Article 2 of

Protocol No. l (P1-2), taken alone or together with

Article 13 (art. 13+P1-2) of the Convention;

- held unanimously that Sweden was to pay, for

non-pecuniary damage, 200 000 Swedish crowns to Cecilia

Eriksson and 100 000 Swedish crowns to her daughter Lisa

and, for legal costs and expenses, 100 000 Swedish crowns

to Cecilia Eriksson;

- rejected unanimously 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 22 June 1989, 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 first applicant, on behalf of herself and of her

daughter, 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 (91) 14

Information provided by the Government of Sweden

during the examination of the Eriksson case

before the Committee of Ministers

According to the new act containing special provisions on the

care of young persons, which was enacted on 8 March 1990 and came

into force on 1 July 1990, any decision concerning prohibition

on removal will henceforth be taken by the Regional

Administrative Court upon an application from the competent

Social Council. Under section 26 of the act, decisions on

prohibition on removal will be reviewed by the Social Council at

least every three months. A temporary prohibition on removal may

be issued by the Social Council but must, according to section

34 of the act, be reviewed by the court within two weeks.

Under section 31 of the Aact, the parents' right of access to a

child subjected to a prohibition on removal will be decided by

the Social Council. Its decisions can, however, according to the

provisions of section 41, paragraph 5, of the act, be appealed

to the Regional Administrative Court. Furthermore, section 33

of the act provides that all questions relating to this act must

be decided speedily.

The sums awarded by the Court were paid by decision dated

27 July 1989.

As regards the first applicant's complaint that since the Court's

judgment she still has no effective access to her daughter Lisa,

the Government of Sweden wishes to recall that under Swedish law

(Chapter 21, sections 5 and 6 of the Parental Code) enforcement

of a court's decision concerning access cannot take place against

the wish of a child who has reached the age of twelve unless the

court finds it necessary in the best interest of the child.

In the present case, Lisa Eriksson reached the age of twelve on

24 February 1990, that is eight months after the Court's

judgment. The Swedish administrative courts have in current

proceedings found that the enforcement of existing decisions

concerning access would be contrary to Lisa Eriksson's own wish.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant