FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos. 44765/06 and 3199/07
Ružica MARINKOVIĆ against Slovenia
and Tadej DEMŠAR against Slovenia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 30 August 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Ganna Yudkivska, President,
Boštjan M. Zupančič,
Angelika Nußberger, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications,
Having regard to the settlement agreements signed by the parties,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
All the applicants are Slovenian nationals living in Slovenia.
The applicant, Ms Ružica Marinković, is a Slovenian national who was born in 1953 and lives in Celje. She was represented before the Court by Ms M. Končan Verstovšek, a lawyer practising in Celje. The applicant, Mr Tadej Demšar, is a Slovenian national who was born in 1958 and lives in Ljubljana. He was represented before the Court by Ms C. Dobnik, a lawyer practising in Ljubljana.
The Slovenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
All the applicants were parties to proceedings which were terminated less than three months after the implementation of the 2006 Act on the Protection of the Right to a Trial without Undue Delay (“the 2006 Act”).
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of civil proceedings and under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective domestic remedy in that regard.
THE LAW
In the present cases the Court notes that, after the Government had been given notice of the applications in 2011, they informed the Court that they had made a settlement proposal to the applicants.
By the settlement agreements signed by the State Attorney’s Office and the applicants, the former acknowledged a violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time and accepted to pay the applicants the non-pecuniary damage sustained and costs and expenses incurred. The applicants accepted the amount as a full compensation for the damage sustained due to the length of the above proceedings and waived any further claims against the Republic of Slovenia in respect of these complaints.
The applicants subsequently informed the Court that they had reached settlements with the State Attorney’s Office and that they wished to withdraw their applications introduced before the Court.
The Court takes note that following the settlements reached between the parties the matter has been resolved at the domestic level and that the applicants wish to withdraw their applications. It is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols does not require the examination of the applications to be continued (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Stephen PhillipsGanna Yudkivska
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy