FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 30173/06
by Iurii BOGDANOV
against Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24 November 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Ljiljana Mijović,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ján Šikuta,
Päivi Hirvelä,
Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 June 2006,
Having regard to the friendly settlement agreement reached by the parties,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Iurii Bogdanov, is a Russian national who was born in 1961 and lives in Chişinău. He is represented before the Court by Mr I. Chibac, a lawyer practising in Chişinău.
On 17 December 2008 the President of the Fourth Section of the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaints under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and under Article 1 of Protocol No.1 in respect of the Government’s failure to fully enforce the final judgment in the applicant’s favour within a reasonable time.
On 26 October 2009 the Court received from the Government a friendly settlement agreement, signed by the parties, by which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Moldova in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 3,356.95 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as 795 euros in costs and expenses, which would be converted into Moldovan lei at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum would 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 the 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 would 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.
Lawrence EarlyNicolas Bratza
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy