FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 466/05
by Raul KOHNER
against the Czech Republic
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 4 November 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Rait Maruste, President,
Karel Jungwiert,
Volodymyr Butkevych,
Renate Jaeger,
Mark Villiger,
Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 December 2004,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Raul Kohner, is a Czech national who was born in 1965 and lives in Plzeň. He was represented before the Court by Mr Vokoun, a lawyer practising in Kladno. The Czech Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr V.A. Schorm, from the Ministry of Justice.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 27 December 1998 an unknown person of Bulgarian origin shot dead a third person in the McDonald’s restaurant in central Prague.
A criminal investigation was instituted.
By a judgment of 26 April 2002 the Municipal Court convicted the applicant of conspiracy to commit both homicides, at the request of the first victim’s wife, and sentenced him to twenty-two years’ imprisonment.
Complaints about the alleged unfairness of the proceedings, raised by the applicant in a constitutional appeal, were found unsubstantiated by the Constitutional Court (Ústavní soud) on 24 June 2004.
COMPLAINTS
Relying on Articles 6 §§ 1 and 3 d) of the Convention, the applicant complained about the alleged unfairness of the proceedings against him.
THE LAW
On 4 September 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Vít Alexander Schorm, Agent of the Government of the Czech Republic, declare that the Government of the Czech Republic offer to pay ex gratia 2,000 euros to Mr Raul Kohner with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the Europeal 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 Czech korunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 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 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.”
On 16 September 2008 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Raul Kohner, note that the Government of the Czech Republic are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of 2,000 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 Czech korunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 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 the Czech Republic 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 public policy 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.
Stephen PhillipsRait Maruste
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy