FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 16937/05
by Małgorzata KWIATKOWSKA
against Germany
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 13 May 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Rait Maruste,
Karel Jungwiert,
Renate Jaeger,
Mark Villiger,
Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 April 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 partial decision of 22 January 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Ms Małgorzata Kwiatkowska, is a Polish national who was born in 1955 and lives in Kirchen in Germany. The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Deputy Agent, Mr H.-J. Behrens, Ministerialrat, of the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In November 1997 the applicant lodged a motion against her husband for alimony with the Westerburg District Court (Amtsgericht), which was rejected on 20 October 1998.
By judgment given on 20 December 1999 the Koblenz Court of Appeal (Oberlandesgericht) quashed the District Court’s judgment and referred the case back to that same court.
By judgment of 5 February 2004 the District Court partially granted the applicant’s claim.
On 28 October 2004 the Koblenz Court of Appeal reduced the amount of alimony to be paid to the applicant.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained about the excessive length of the proceedings before the German courts.
THE LAW
On 25 March 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Dr Hans-Jörg Behrens, Deputy Agent of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, declare that the Government of Germany offer to pay ex gratia 8,000 euros to Ms Małgorzata Kwiatkowska 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 free of any taxes that may be applicable and 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.”
On 26 March 2008 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I, Ms Małgorzata Kwiatkowska note that the Government of Germany are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of 8,000 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 free of any taxes that may be applicable and 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 Germany 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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and 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.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy