SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 40665/05
by Şadiye EL
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 27 September 2011 as a Committee composed of:
David Thór Björgvinsson, President,
Giorgio Malinverni,
Guido Raimondi, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 October 2005,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Şadiye El, is aTurkish national who was born in 1931 and lives in İzmir. She was represented before the Court by Mr İ. Solak, a lawyer practising in Batman. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
On 14 October 2010 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the length of civil proceedings, which started on 19 April 1982 and were still pending when the application was introduced, and the alleged interference with peaceful enjoyment of the applicant’s possession.
On 20 December 2010 and 19 April 2011 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her EUR 16,100 (sixteen thousand one hundred euros) to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Turkish liras at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. The sum 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.
Françoise Elens-PassosDavid Thór Björgvinsson
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy