FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 26393/10
by Carl BIRCH and Others
against the United Kingdom
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 6 September 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Lech Garlicki, President,
Nicolas Bratza,
Ljiljana Mijović,
George Nicolaou,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Nebojša Vučinić,
Vincent A. de Gaetano, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 May 2010,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicants, Mr Carl Birch, Mr Russel Atkins, Mr David Lynch and Mr Paul Taylor are British nationals who were born in 1961, 1964, 1950 and 1965 respectively and live in Luton. They are represented before the Court by Ms S. Willman of Pierce Glynn Solicitors, a lawyer practising in London. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms A. Sornarajah of the Foreign & Commonwealth Office.
The applicants complained under Article 8 of the Convention that possession proceedings brought against them violated their right to respect for their home.
On 26 July 2011 and 28 July 2011 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against the United Kingdom in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay to each of them 2,000 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses and any tax that might be chargeable, which would be converted into British Pounds at the rate applicable on the date of payment. 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.
Fatoş AracıLech Garlicki
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy