Search
document

Document text Analytics

LARS BRAMELID AND ANNE MARIE MALMSTRÖM AGAINST SWEDEN

Doc ref: 8588/79;8589/79 • ECHR ID: 001-49253

Document date: October 25, 1984

Inbound citations: 0
•
Cited paragraphs: 0
•
Outbound citations: 1

LARS BRAMELID AND ANNE MARIE MALMSTRÖM AGAINST SWEDEN

Doc ref: 8588/79;8589/79 • ECHR ID: 001-49253

Document date: October 25, 1984

Cited paragraphs only

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of

the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental

Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the Convention"),

Having regard to the report drawn up by the European Commission of

Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the Convention

relating to the applications lodged by Mr Lars Bramelid and

Mrs Anne Marie Malmström against Sweden (Applications Nos. 8588/79 and

8589/79);

Whereas on 3 February 1984 the Commission transmitted the said report

to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months

provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the Convention

has elapsed without the case having been brought before the European

Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the

Convention;

Whereas in their applications introduced on 26 February 1979 the

applicants complained that they had been compelled to surrender their

shares for a price below their real value alleging a breach of

Article 1 of the First Protocol (P1-1) to the Convention, that the

arbitrators to whom their dispute was referred did not constitute a

"tribunal" within the meaning of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of

the Convention and that they were not afforded an effective remedy

before a national authority alleging a breach of Article 13 (art. 13)

of the Convention;

Whereas the Commission, after having declared the applications partly

admissible, in its report adopted on 12 December 1983, examined

whether the applicants' right under Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1),

of the Convention to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable

time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law was

respected, and whether the applicants had an effective remedy before a

national authority, as required by Article 13 (art. 13) of the

Convention, against the violations of the Convention that they allege;

Whereas in its report the Commission unanimously expressed the opinion

that there had been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1),

of the Convention in so far as the applicants' case was not heard

publicly by an independent and impartial tribunal and that it was not

necessary to examine the applications under Article 13 (art. 13) of

the Convention;

Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance

with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the Convention;

Whereas during the examination of this case, the Government of Sweden

informed the Committee of Ministers that it accepted the report of the

Commission in this case and that the Swedish Parliament had adopted an

amendment to the legislation which had come into force on 1 July 1984

according to which a party not satisfied with a decision of the

arbitrators could start a procedure before an ordinary court;

Noting with satisfaction that Sweden has already amended its

legislation in this sense;

Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1

(art. 32-1), of the Convention,

a. Decides that in this case there has been a violation of

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

b. Decides, having regard to the information supplied by the

Government of Sweden, that no further action is called for in this

case.

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant