Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)265[1]

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

Muñoz Diaz against Spain

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which provides that the Committee supervises the execution of final judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” and “the Court”)[2],

Having regard to the judgment transmitted by the Court to the Committee once it became final;

Case name (App. No.)

Judgment of

Final on

Muñoz Diaz (49151/07)

8/12/2009

8/03/2010

Recalling that a finding of violations by the Court requires, over and above the payment of just satisfaction awarded in the judgments, the adoption by the respondent state, where appropriate, of individual measures to put an end to the violations and as far as possible to remedy their consequences for the applicant and general measures to prevent new, similar violations;

Having invited the authorities of the respondent state to provide an action plan concerning the measures proposed to execute the judgment;

Having, in accordance with the Committee’s Rules for the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention, examined the action report provided by the government (see appendix);

Having noted that the respondent state paid the applicant the just satisfaction, as provided in the judgment;

DECLARES, that it has exercised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in these cases and

DECIDES to close the examination thereof.

Appendix to Resolution CM/ResDH(2011)265

Information about the measures to comply with the judgment in the case of

Muñoz Diaz against Spain

ACTION REPORT[3]

CASE: MUÑOZ DÍAZ against Spain

APPLICATION No.: 49151/07

JUDGMENT DATE: 8/12/2009

DATE OF TRANSMISSION FOR EXECUTION: 8/03/2010

ORIGINAL FRENCH

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE: The European Court considered that there had been a violation of Article 14 of the Convention (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions) on the ground that entitlement to receive Spanish social security benefits constituted a proprietary right for the purposes of the Convention. The Court considered that in the present case the application for a reversionary pension had been dealt with dif