SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 39389/10
Erdal ÇERİ
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 8 October 2019 as a Committee composed of:
Valeriu Griţco, President,
Egidijus Kūris,
Darian Pavli, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 May 2010,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 31 May 2019 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to that declaration,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Erdal Çeri, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1974 and lives in Istanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr H. Köksoy, a lawyer practising in Samsun.
The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
On 26 June 2017 the applicant’s complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the inability to increase his pecuniary claims in the course of the compensation proceedings was given notice to the Government.
On 31 May 2019 the Government submitted a unilateral declaration. They acknowledged that the applicant’s inability to increase his pecuniary claims in the course of the compensation proceedings on account of a procedural restriction at the time, namely the prohibition of amendment in the Code of Administrative Procedure, breached his right to a fair trial. The Government further undertook to pay 1,000 (one thousand) euros to the applicant as just satisfaction. They further emphasized that Article 53 § 1(ı) of the Code of Administrative Procedure, as amended by Law no. 7145 of 31 July 2018 now provided for the reopening of administrative court proceedings in cases where the European Court of Human Rights decided to strike an application out of its list of cases following a friendly settlement or a unilateral declaration. They considered that the aforementioned remedy was capable of providing redress in respect of the applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
On 16 August 2019 the applicant replied that he had taken note of the Government’s acknowledgment of the violation and accepted the terms of the declaration.
THE LAW
The Court considers that the applicant’s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government should be considered as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Cēsnieks v. Latvia (dec.), no. 9278/06, § 34, 6 March 2012, and Bakal and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 8243/08, 5 June 2012).
The Court therefore takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It considers that the amount proposed by the Government should be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment and paid within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to settle within this period, simple interest shall be payable on the amount in question at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment shall constitute the final resolution of the case before the Court. 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 case 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 7 November 2019.
Hasan BakırcıValeriu Griţco
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy