TRE TRAKTÖRER AKTIEBOLAG v. SWEDEN JUDGMENT 20 3. Conclusion 63. The Court thus concludes that there has been no violation of Article 1 of the Protocol (P1-1). IV. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 50 (art. 50) OF THE CONVENTION 64. Article 50 (art. 50) provides: "If the Court finds that a decision or a measure taken by a legal authority or any other authority of a High Contracting Party is completely or partially in conflict with the obligations arising from the ... Convention, and if the internal law of the said Party allows only partial reparation to be made for the consequences of this decision or measure, the decision of the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party." The applicant company sought compensation for pecuniary damage and reimbursement of its costs and expenses. A. Pecuniary damage 65. The applicant company claimed that the proceedings leading to the revocation of its licence caused it losses amounting to 3,996,000 SEK; to this amount had to be added an allowance for inflation at the annual rate of 5% and interest at 16% per annum. Furthermore, because of the audit report, Mrs Flenman’s taxable income had been increased by 100,000 SEK (see paragraph 12 above); although eventually the County Court reduced this amount and the authorities made a refund of tax, this did not reflect the annual inflation rate and the claim also extended to this aspect of the case. 66. The Court agrees, however, with the Government’s contention that there is no causal link between any of the alleged pecuniary damage and the violation of Article 6 para. 1 (art. 6-1) found in this judgment. The withdrawal of the licence admittedly had adverse effects on the goodwill and the value of the restaurant Le Cardinal (see paragraph 43 above). Nevertheless, the Court cannot speculate as to what the result of the proceedings might have been if the applicant company had been able to bring this question before a court. The increase in Mrs Flenman’s taxable income, for its part, had no direct relationship with the revocation of the licence. No award can therefore be made in respect of pecuniary damage. B. Costs and expenses 67. The applicant company claimed, as costs and expenses: (a) the fees of Mr Bergkrans, TTA’s counsel during the initial phase of the domestic proceedings (16,000 SEK);