FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 8308/08
by Ivan KUŠENIĆ
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 18 June 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina Vajić,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 January 2008,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ivan Kušenić, is a Croatian national who was born in 1947 and lives in Bistra. He was represented before the Court by Mr Z. Novaković, a lawyer practising in Zagreb. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
Zagreb Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Zagrebu), seeking partition of the matrimonial property.
Meanwhile, on 22 March 2006 the applicant lodged a complaint about the length of the above proceedings in the Zagreb County Court (Županijski sud u Zagrebu). On 6 February 2007 the County Court accepted the complaint, found a violation of the applicant’s right to a hearing within the reasonable time and awarded the applicant compensation in the amount of 8,000 Croatian kunas (HRK). The County Court also ordered the first-instance court to give a decision in the shortest time possible but not later than six months.
It appears that the proceedings are still pending before the court of first instance.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the civil proceedings instituted against him in July 1994.
THE LAW
On 18 May 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I note that the Government of Croatia are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of 4,500 euros to Mr Ivan Kušenić 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 the national currency 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.
Having consulted my client, I would inform you that he accepts the proposal and waives any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. He declares that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”
On 20 May 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Croatia offer to pay ex gratia 4,500 euros to Mr Ivan Kušenić 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 the national currency 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 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). 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.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy