THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22973/10
Andrej HREBÍK and Ľuboš HREBÍK
against Slovakia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 27 March 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Nona Tsotsoria, President,
Ján Šikuta,
Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 April 2010,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicants, Mr Andrej Hrebík and Mr Ľuboš Hrebík, are Slovak nationals who were born in 1935 and 1961 respectively and live in Križovany nad Dudváhom. The Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Pirošíková.
The applicants complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the length of proceedings concerning an estate and that they had no effective remedy at their disposal in that respect.
On 26 January 2012 and 24 February 2012 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay 8,500 euros each to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, 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.
Marialena TsirliNona Tsotsoria
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy