THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 76639/12
Begza BOGUĆANIN
against Serbia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 29 September 2015 as a Committee composed of:
Valeriu Griţco, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Mārtiņš Mits, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 November 2012,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Begza Bogućanin, was a Serbian national, who was born in 1955 and lived in Novi Pazar. She was represented before the Court by Ms R. Garibović, a lawyer practising in Novi Pazar. The applicant died in the course of proceedings before the Court.
The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms V. Rodić.
The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the respondent State’s failure to enforce the final court decisions of the Novi Pazar Municipal Court of 22 September 2004 and 4 May 2005 (as amended on 24 May 2005), rendered in her favour, according to which a socially-owned company “Raška” Pamučna predionica DOO was ordered to pay her certain sums. These court decisions remain unenforced to the present day.
On 28 August 2013 the application was communicated to the Government.
On 29 December 2014 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant had died in the course of proceedings before the Court. In addition, the representative informed the Court that the applicant’s widower and daughter, Mr Sibo Bogućanin and Ms Farisa Bogućanin, had been declared as her heirs and that they had expressed the wish to further pursue the application in her stead.
On 6 April 2015 and 25 May 2015 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant’s heirs agreed to waive any further claims against Serbia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay them jointly 2,000 EUR (two thousand euros), less any amounts which may have already been paid in that regard at the domestic level, to cover any non‑pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into local currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be 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. 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 parties, furthermore, agreed that within the said three-month period the Government would pay, from their own funds, the sums awarded in the domestic decisions under consideration in the present case, less any amounts which may have already been paid on the basis of the said decisions, plus the costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings. These payments will constitute the final resolution of the case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
THE LAW
To begin with, the Court reiterates that in cases where an applicant had died in the course of the proceedings, it had previously taken into account the statements of the applicant’s heirs or close family members expressing the wish to pursue the proceedings before it (see, for example, Kovačić and Others v. Slovenia [GC], nos. 44574/98, 45133/98 and 48316/99, §§ 189-192, 3 October 2008; and Janowiec and Others v. Russia [GC], nos. 55508/07 and 29520/09, § 98, ECHR 2013).
In the instant case the Court is satisfied that both Mr Sibo Bogućanin and Ms Farisa Bogućanin are the next of kin of the deceased applicant. Accordingly, it accepts that they may pursue the application in the late applicant’s stead.
Furthermore, 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. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the application out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 22 October 2015.
Marialena TsirliValeriu Griţco
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy