FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 29292/03
by Borka BOŽIĆ
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 20 October 2005 as a Chamber composed of
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrL. Loucaides,
MrsF. Tulkens,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrD. Spielmann, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 August 2003,
Having regard to the decision to apply the procedure under Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mrs Borka Božić, is a Croatian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Zagreb.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant was working at former Military Hospital in Zagreb as a physician.
On 24 July 1991 the Croatian Government adopted a decree (Uredba o zabrani raspolaganja nekretninama na teritoriju Republike Hrvatske) which forbade any transactions concerning property of the Yugoslav People’s Army (“the YPA”) pending the process of dissolution of the former Yugoslavia.
On 1 October 1991, the YPA, Zagreb Garrison issued a decision granting the applicant the right to use and privatise a flat in Zagreb that was owned by the YPA. On the same date the applicant, together with her son, moved into the flat.
On 3 October 1991 the Government adopted another decree (Uredba o preuzimanju sredstava JNA i SSNO na teritoriju Republike Hrvatske u vlasništvo Republike Hrvatske) deciding to take over all YPA property in Croatia.
On 16 March 1993, while the applicant was at work, a certain N.B. broke in and occupied her flat.
On 23 March 1993 the applicant instituted civil proceedings against N.B. for disturbance of possession with the Zagreb Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Zagrebu).
On 7 May 1993 the Municipal Court ruled in the applicant’s favour and ordered N.B. to vacate the flat.
On 21 May 1993 the applicant applied for the enforcement of the above decision with the Zagreb Municipal Court. On 25 May 1993 the court issued a writ of execution (rješenje o izvršenju) for N.B.’s eviction.
During the proceedings N.B. died and the applicant continued the enforcement against his sister who had, in the meantime, moved into the flat.
The proceedings are still pending.
COMPLAINTS
1.The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings.
2.The applicant further complained under Article 13 about lack of an effective remedy in respect of her length complaint.
3.The applicant also complained that the prolonged inability to repossess her flat had violated her right to respect for home under Article 8 of the Convention and her right to peaceful enjoyment of her possessions as guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
THE LAW
By her letter of 2 September 2005 the applicant informed the Court that she accepted a proposal for a friendly settlement and waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application.
On 12 September 2005 the Government informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the Government would pay the applicant 16,100 euros in full and final settlement of the case, costs and expenses included.
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 (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy