Mattsson v. Sweden

 Application No. 13425/87

by Bernt MATTSSON

against Sweden

The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private

on 27 May 1991, the following members being present:

MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President

J.A. FROWEIN

S. TRECHSEL

E. BUSUTTIL

A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK

A. WEITZEL

J.-C. SOYER

H.G. SCHERMERS

H. DANELIUS

Sir Basil HALL

MM. F. MARTINEZ RUIZ

C.L. ROZAKIS

Mrs. J. LIDDY

MM. L. LOUCAIDES

J.-C. GEUS

A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO

M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

B. MARXER

Mr. H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the

Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

Having regard to the application introduced on 20 August 1987

by Bernt Mattsson against Sweden and registered on 30 November 1987

under file No. 13425/87;

Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the

Rules of Procedure of the Commission;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Swedish citizen, born in 1918 and resident

at Huddinge. Before the Commission he is represented by Mr. Bo

Forsberg, a lawyer practising at Huddinge.

The applicant owns half of a property, Förslöv 25:3, situated

at Båstad.

The applicant asked the Building Committee (byggnadsnämnden)

of Båstad for a permit to use one of the three houses on the property,

an out-house, for permanent residence and for a permit to change the

shape of some windows of that house.

On 16 September 1985, the Building Committee rejected the

application. The applicant appealed to the County Administrative Board

(länsstyrelsen) of the Kristianstad County. On 8 July 1986 the County

Administrative Board rejected the appeal.

The applicant appealed to the Government (the Ministry of

Housing) contending inter alia that the restrictions on his personal

freedom which he had suffered as a result of the decision of the

County Administrative Board violated the European Convention on Human

Rights. He further submitted that the Building Committee had exceeded

its competence, that his individual interests should be taken into

account and that the permit was important for him and his family.

On 5 March 1987, the Government rejected the appeal finding no

special reasons to grant exemption from the prohibition against urban

development.

Before the Commission the applicant complained that, since the

Government's decision cannot be challenged before a court, there has

been a violation of Article 6 of the Convention. He also referred to

his rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention in so

far as he had been refused permission to make alterations to his

house.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 20 August 1987 and

registered on 30 November 1987.

On 2 May 1989 the Commission decided to communicate the

application to the respondent Government without inviting them to

submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the

application, and to adjourn further examination of the case until

the European Court of Human Rights had delivered judgment in the

Skärby case. On 28 June 1990 the Court delivered judgment in that

case (Eur. Court H.R., Skärby judgment of 28 June 1990, Series A no.

180-B).

On 13 July 1990 the Commission invited the respondent

Government to submit written observations on the admissibility and

merits of the application.

The Government's observations were submitted on 22 October

1990 No observations in reply from the applicant were received.

On 11 April 1991 the Government informed the Commission that a

settlement had been reached and enclosed a copy of this settlement

which reads as follows:

"SETTLEMENT

On 20 August 1987, Mr. Bernt Mattsson introduced an

application with the European Commission of Human Rights. It was

registered under No. 13425/87. After having been invited to submit its

written observations on the admissibility and merits of the

application the Government, by letter of 22 October 1990, waived

objections against the admissibility with regard to the complaints

under Article 6 and admitted that there had been a violation of that

Article.

The Government and the applicant have now reached the

following friendly settlement on the basis of respect for human rights

as defined in the Convention in order to terminate the proceedings

before the Commission.

a) The Government will pay the sum of SEK 15.000 to the

applicant, including legal costs.

b) The applicant declares that he has no further claims in

the matter.

c) The parties agree that the application is struck off the

Commission's list of cases.

This settlement is dependent upon the formal approval of the

Government.

Stockholm 27 February 1991 Stockholm 19 March 1991

(signed) (signed)

Carl Henrik Ehrenkrona Bo Forsberg

Agent of the Swedish Counsel for the

Government applicant"

The settlement was approved by the Government on 4 April 1991.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Having regard to Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention, the

Commission notes that the matter has been resolved. Furthermore, it

finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as

defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the

examination of the application.

For these reasons, the Commission unanimously

DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF THE LIST OF CASES.

Secretary to the Commission President of the Commission

(H. C. KRUGER) (C. A. NØRGAARD)