SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 36418/06
by Ayşe AYTEN and Mehmet AYKUT
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 13 September 2011 as a Committee composed of:
David Thór Björgvinsson, President,
Giorgio Malinverni,
Guido Raimondi, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 August 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicants, Ms Ayşe Ayten and Mr Mehmet Aykut, are Turkish nationals who were born in 1956 and 1940 respectively and live in Düzce. They were represented before the Court by Mr K. Hatipoğlu, a lawyer practising in Düzce. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of proceedings concerning the registration of certain plots of land following cadastral surveys.
On 21 June 2010 and 20 April 2011 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay them EUR 16,000 (sixteen thousand euros) jointly to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Turkish Liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.
THE LAW
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Françoise Elens-PassosDavid Thór Björgvinsson Deputy Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy