CASE OF SKÄRBY v. SWEDENDISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE RYSSDAL
Doc ref: • ECHR ID:
Document date: June 28, 1990
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE RYSSDAL
The applicants applied to the Building Committee for permission to
build a house and two garages on a part of their estate which,
according to a confirmed building plan, was designated as a nature
park. Their application was however rejected on 24 March 1986 on the
ground that the proposed buildings did not comply with the building
plan in force.
It is established case-law that Article 6 § 1 (art. 6-1) guarantees
to everyone claiming that an interference by a public authority with
his "civil rights" is unlawful the right to submit that claim to a
tribunal satisfying the requirements of that provision.
The question is, however, whether in the present case it was alleged
that the Building Committee acted unlawfully as a matter of Swedish
law.
The applicants obviously considered the decision of 24 March 1986 to
be wrong, but they did not advance any reasons for their claim that
the Building Committee was legally bound to grant an exemption from
the building plan. I share the opinion of the minority of the
European Commission of Human Rights that the applicants simply
disputed the way in which the Building Committee exercised its
discretion and that Article 6 § 1 (art. 6-1) is not applicable.