FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 62697/16
Monika KARPIUK
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 19 June 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Aleš Pejchal, President,
Krzysztof Wojtyczek,
Jovan Ilievski, judges,
and Abel Campos, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 October 2016,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Ms Monika Karpiuk, is a Polish national, who was born in 1980 and lives in Warsaw. She was represented before the Court by Mr J. Golonka, a lawyer practising in Warsaw.
2. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs J. Chrzanowska of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
3. The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention about the unlawfulness and arbitrariness of her detention on remand. She further alleged under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) that she had been made to waive her right to be present at the trial.
4. On 26 February 2018 and 19 April 2018 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 17,000 Polish zlotys to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be 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. 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
A. Complaints under Article 5 and 6 of the Convention
5. 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.
B. Application of Rule 43 § 4 of the Rules of Court
6. The applicant also claimed, without specifying any amount, reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred before the Court.
7. The Court reiterates that it has the discretion to award legal costs when it strikes out an application (Rule 43 § 4 of the Rules of Court). The general principles governing reimbursement of costs under Rule 43 § 4 are essentially the same as under Article 41 of the Convention. An award can be made to an applicant in respect of costs and expenses only in so far as they have been actually and necessarily incurred and are reasonable as to quantum.
8. In the present case, the applicant did not substantiate her claim with any documents or evidence. Accordingly the Court concludes that it is not appropriate to make any award in respect of reimbursement of costs.
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 12 July 2018.
Abel CamposAleš Pejchal
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy