FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 29383/09
by Mia KOHI and Matti KUISMA
against Finland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 4 May 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Nicolas Bratza, President,
Giovanni Bonello,
David Thór Björgvinsson,
Ján Šikuta,
Päivi Hirvelä,
Ledi Bianku,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Fatos Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 June 2009,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Ms Mia Kohi and Mr Matti Kuisma. They are Finnish nationals who were born in 1971 and 1947 respectively and live in Espoo. The Finnish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Arto Kosonen of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the length of the civil proceedings.
On 29 and 30 March 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Finland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay them 14,500 euros[1] to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It would 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.
Fatoş AracıNicolas Bratza
Deputy RegistrarPresident
[1] This sum includes EUR 14,000 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 500 for costs and expenses (inclusive of VAT).
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy