FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 20265/14
Arnulf BJØRNEVIK
against Norway
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 10 July 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Yonko Grozev, President,
Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer,
Lado Chanturia, judges,
and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 March 2014,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr Arnulf Bjørnevik, is a Norwegian national who was born in 1956 and lives in Østerås. He was represented before the Court by Mr Bent Endresen, residing in Stavanger.
2. The Norwegian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr Marius Emberland of the Attorney General’s Office (Civil Matters) as their Agent.
3. The applicant complained that his placement in Ila prison entailed a violation of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention as he was not undergoing any treatment, a situation which was not in accordance with the Supreme Court’s judgment of 2011. Moreover, all the other detainees at Ila were prisoners serving criminal sentences. The applicant also complained that there had been a breach of his right under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention to take proceedings, since his request for a periodic review of his detention had not been decided “speedily” by the domestic courts during the third set of proceedings.
4. After the Government had been given notice of the application, the parties informed the Court that they had reached a friendly settlement agreement in the case on 21 June 2018. A copy of the mentioned agreement was attached to the letter. The Government acknowledged that the applicant’s rights under Article 5 of the Convention had been violated, and agreed to pay the applicant compensation for non-pecuniary damage in the amount of 150,000 Norwegian kroner (NOK) and compensation for the applicant’s legal costs before the Court in the amount of NOK 100,000, inclusive of value-added tax. The applicant stated that he agreed to waive any further claims against Norway in respect of the facts giving rise to this application.
THE LAW
5. In the light of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.
Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 6 September 2018.
Milan BlaškoYonko Grozev
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy