FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22928/06
by Jaroslav HOCHMANN
against Slovakia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23 September 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Lech Garlicki,
Giovanni Bonello,
Ljiljana Mijović,
Ján Šikuta,
Mihai Poalelungi,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 May 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Jaroslav Hochmann, is a Slovakian national who was born in 1964 and lives in Košice. The Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Pirošíková.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
1. Proceedings concerning the action of 9 November 1992
On 9 November 1992 the applicant lodged an action with the Košice I District Court claiming that the defendant should be ordered to remove buildings constructed on the applicant's land.
Following an expert's appeal against the decision on his costs the case was pending before the court of appeal for four months in 1996.
Several experts were appointed and the District Court finally allowed the action on 23 November 2000.
On 3 July 2001 the Košice Regional Court quashed the judgment and remitted the case to the District Court.
On 25 March 2002 the proceedings were stayed pending the outcome of another set of proceedings (“the related proceedings”) where the defendant sought settlement of the ownership disputes over the land in issue. As no appeal was lodged, the decision became final on 10 May 2002.
On 30 November 2005 the related proceedings were discontinued as the action had been withdrawn.
On 19 March 2007 the District Court ordered an expert opinion in the proceedings concerning the action of 1992.
On 4 October 2007 the District Court accepted a friendly settlement reached between the parties.
2. Constitutional proceedings
On 1 December 2004 the Constitutional Court found that the Košice I District Court had violated the applicant's right under Article 48 § 2 of the Constitution to a hearing without unjustified delay. It admitted that the factual complexity of the case had contributed to the length of the proceedings. The Constitutional Court found that there had been delays in the proceedings before they had been stayed. It also concluded that their overall duration of twelve years was constitutionally unacceptable. It did not order the District Court to proceed without any further delay on the ground that the proceedings had been stayed.
The Constitutional Court ordered reimbursement of the applicant's legal costs and held that the finding of a violation represented in itself sufficient satisfaction in the circumstances of the case. In particular, due to the applicant's failure to appeal against the decision by which the proceedings had been stayed, it considered it appropriate to make no award of just satisfaction in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings.
THE LAW
On 31 July 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Marica Pirošíková, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of the Slovak Republic offer to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 9,000 (nine thousand euros) to Mr Jaroslav Hochmann with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into Slovak korunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 undertake 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.”
On 18 July 2008 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Jaroslav Hochmann, the applicant, note that the Government of the Slovak Republic are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of EUR 9,000 (nine thousand euros) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into Slovak korunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
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).
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Lawrence Early Nicolas Bratza
Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy