FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 24535/05
by Igor Yuriyovych KOZEDUB
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 3 July 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrP. Lorenzen, President,
MrsS. Botoucharova,
MrK. Jungwiert,
MrV. Butkevych,
MrsM. Tsatsa-Nikolovska,
MrR. Maruste,
MrsR. Jaeger, judges,
and Mrs C. Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 June 2005,
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 observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Igor Yuriyovych Kozedub, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1959 and lives in the town of Novyy Kalyniv, Ukraine.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In August 2002 the applicant retired from the Armed Forces. At the same time the applicant instituted proceedings in the Sambir District Court of Lviv Region against the military unit, claiming compensation for his uniform.
On 27 December 2002 the court awarded the applicant UAH 1,945.1[1] in compensation for his uniform (Рішення місцевого суду Самбірського району Львівської області). This judgment was not appealed against and became final.
On 11 February 2003 the Sambir District Bailiffs’ Service (Відділ Державної виконавчої служби Самбірського районого управління юстиції Львівської області) initiated the enforcement proceedings.
By letter of 14 December 2004 the Lviv Regional Department of Justice informed the applicant that the debtor’s bank accounts had been seized, and that the execution of the judgment would take place as soon as State budgetary funds were transferred to them.
On 12 October 2005 the Bailiffs’ Service returned the writ of execution to the applicant, as there were no funds to enforce the judgment.
The judgment remains unenforced.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained about the non-enforcement of the court judgment in his favour relying on Article 13 of the Convention.
THE LAW
On 28 April 2006 the Court received the following declaration, signed by the applicant:
I, Igor Yuriyovych KOZEDUB, note that the Government of Ukraine are prepared to pay the judgment debt still owed to me, as well as to pay me ex gratia the sum of EUR 2,000 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
The sum of EUR 2,000 will be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 Ukraine in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached.
On 29 May 2006 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
I, Yuriy ZAYTSEV, Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights, declare that the Government of Ukraine offer to pay the judgment debt still owed to Mr Igor Yuriyovych Kozedub, as well as to pay him ex gratia the sum of EUR 2,000 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
The sum of EUR 2,000 will be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 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 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.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
[1] Around EUR 354.3
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy