SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 18565/12
Neven GUNJAK
against Serbia
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 1 October 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, President,
Dragoljub Popović,
Helen Keller, judges,
and Seçkin Erel, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 January 2004,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Neven Gunjak, is a Serbian national, who was born in 1956 and lives in Ruma.
The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr S. Carić.
The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention of the excessive length of civil proceedings concerning damages, as well as of a lack of an effective remedy in that respect.
On 20 March 2013 and 7 May 2013 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Serbia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him EUR 3,000 (three thousand euros) to cover any non-pecuniary damage, which will be converted into the local currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. 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 the 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.
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.
Seçkin Erel Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy