FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 54110/09
Revaz LALIASHVILI
against Georgia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 27 May 2014 as a Committee composed of:
Päivi Hirvelä, President,
Nona Tsotsoria,
Faris Vehabović, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 September 2009,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 8 April 2014 and the applicant’s acceptance of its terms,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr Revaz Laliashvili, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1970 and lives in Tbilisi. He was represented before the Court by Mr O. Sukashvili, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi.
2. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice.
3. On 4 May 2013 the Court gave notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning his alleged ill-treatment by prison officers, the failure to launch investigation in this regard and the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings conducted against him.
4. On 8 April 2014 the Court received a friendly settlement proposal from the Government, which after being subsequently rectified on 26 April 2014, reads as follows:
“With due regard to the applicant’s complaints under the Convention, in particular those communicated under Articles 3 and 6 raising issues of criminal investigation into the alleged ill-treatment in prison and a fair hearing in the determination of criminal charges against him;
Willing to ensure a friendly settlement of the case, the Government undertake to ensure Mr Revaz Laliashvili’s early release from imprisonment no later than July 2014.
The fulfilment of this condition shall constitute the final resolution of the present case.”
5. By a letter of 28 April 2014 the applicant informed the Court that he accepted the terms of the Government’s proposal.
THE LAW
6. 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 reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Fatoş AracıPäivi Hirvelä
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy