FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 55181/10
Zlatko BUKOVAC
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 July 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 September 2010,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Zlatko Bukovac, is a Croatian national, who was born in 1950 and lives in Sveti Ivan Zelina. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Smolek, a lawyer practising in Zagreb.
The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik.
The applicant complained under Article 6 and 13 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings and the lack of an effective remedy in that respect.
On 2 April 2012 and 6 June 2012 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 7,000 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Croatian kunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be free of any taxes that may be applicable. 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.
André WampachPeer Lorenzen
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy