THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 9933/03
by Panagiotis KOTSIDIS
against Sweden
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 20 February 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrJ. Hedigan, President,
MrsE. Fura-Sandström,
MrsA. Gyulumyan,
MrE. Myjer,
MrDavid Thór Björgvinsson,
MrsI. Ziemele,
MrsI. Berro-Lefèvre, judges,
and Mr S. Quesada, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 March 2003,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having regard to the Greek Government’s tacit wish not to exercise their right under Article 36 § 1 of the Convention to intervene in the proceedings,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, the late Mr Panagiotis Kotsidis, was a Greek national, born in 1956, and was living in Greece. Following his death on 18 March 2006, his widow, Ms Eva Kotsidis, declared that she wished to pursue the application on his behalf. He is represented before the Court by Mr B. Leidhammar, a lawyer practising in Stockholm.
The respondent Government are represented by their Agent Ms I. Kalmerborn of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In his tax return for the tax assessment year 1992, the applicant informed the Tax Authority (Skattemyndigheten) in Uppsala County that, on 11 June 1991, he had moved to Greece and that, since then, he had declared his income and assets in that country.
By decision of 22 February 1993, the Tax Authority found that the applicant had sold his shares in his company and that the sale had been finalised through a contract dated 15 May 1991 for which reason the applicant was liable to pay taxes for the capital gain in Sweden as he was still resident there at the time. It further imposed tax surcharges on him, amounting to approximately EUR 104,000.
The Tax Authority then rejected several requests by the applicant for reconsiderations of its decision and, in September 1993, it forwarded the appeal to the County Administrative Court (länsrätten) of the County of Uppsala.
On 10 June 1997, after having held an oral hearing, the County Administrative Court rejected the applicant’s appeal, sharing the Tax Authority’s conclusions.
On 27 August 1997 the applicant appealed to the Administrative Court of Appeal (kammarrätten) in Stockholm, maintaining his claims and adding that the imposition of tax surcharges violated Article 6 of the Convention.
On 6 June 2001 the Administrative Court of Appeal held an oral hearing and, on 28 June 2001, it rejected the appeal. With regard to the tax surcharges, it found that, although Article 6 of the Convention was applicable, the provision had not been violated in the present case.
The applicant appealed to Supreme Administrative Court (Regeringsrätten) which, on 24 September 2002, refused leave to appeal.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the length of the proceedings was excessive.
THE LAW
On 16 January 2007 the Court received the following declaration from the Swedish Government, signed by the Agent of the Government on 3 November 2006 and by the applicant’s representative on 6 November 2006:
“On 19 March 2003, Mr Panagiotis Kotsidis (“the applicant”) lodged application no. 9933/03 against Sweden with the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”). The application was communicated to the Swedish Government (“the Government”) on 17 March 2005. The applicant died on 18 March 2006 and the application has been pursued by his legal successor, his wife Eva Kotsidis.
The Government and Ms Eva Kotsidis have now reached the following friendly settlement on the basis of respect for human rights, as defined in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in order to terminate the proceedings before the Court.
a) The Government will pay, ex gratia, the sum of SEK 90,000 (ninety thousand) to Ms Eva Kotsidis. The amount will be paid to her counsel, Mr Börje Leidhammar, who has been authorised to receive payment on her behalf. Execution of payment will take place when the Government has received the Court’s decision striking the case out of its list of cases.
b) Ms Eva Kotsidis declares that she has no further claims on the Swedish State based on the facts of the above application.
This settlement is dependent upon the formal approval of the Government at a Cabinet meeting.”
The settlement was approved by the Swedish Government on 21 December 2006.
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). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Santiago QuesadaJohn Hedigan
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy