Case no 25490/94
The applicant is the owner of a piece of property, Skälby 2:5, in the municipality of Västerås. It is part of a joint hunting area (jaktvårdsområde), which was formed in 1987 by a decision of the County Administrative Board (Länsstyrelsen) of the County of Västerbotten in accordance with the Act on Joint Hunting Areas (Lagen om jaktvårds-områden, 1980:894). Section 1 of that Act provides that such areas may be established for the purpose of promoting the preservation of game and the hunting rights holders' common interests. In accordance with that Section, the holders of the hunting rights within the area formed a hunting association (jaktvårdsområdesförening) to administer the hunting. Its statutes were approved by the County Administrative Board Under Section 3 of the above Act, the owner of a property belonging to a joint hunting area is a member of the hunting association. The applicant could hunt within the joint area, including his own property, but was obliged to co-ordinate the hunting with the other hunting rights holders.
In 1992, the applicant requested that his property be registered as a separate elk-hunting area under Section 33 of the Hunting Act (Jaktlagen, 1987:259).
After having consulted the above association, which did not accept that the applicant's property be excluded from the joint hunting area, the County Administrative Board, by decision of 10 March 1993,
found that the applicant's property, being part of the joint area, could not be registered as a separate elk-hunting area. It thus rejected the applicant's request. On 7 May 1993 the decision was upheld by the Administrative Court of Appeal (Kammarrätten) of Stockholm. On 14 March 1994 the Supreme Administrative Court (Regeringsrätten) refused leave to appeal. (...)
1. The applicant complains of a violation of Article 11 (Art. 11) of the Convention. (...)
The Commission notes that the decisions complained of concerned the applicant's request to have his property registered as a separate elk-hunting area. It did not address or affect the applicant's membership of the hunting association. In any case, the Commission finds that the association has been established under the relevant legislation in the public interest for the administration of hunting and preservation of game and that it is comparable to a public institution which cannot be considered as an association within the meaning of Article 11 (Art. 11) of the Convention.
It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the Convention.