THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 11950/06
by Gheorghe MEDEŞAN
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 18 October 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Alvina Gyulumyan, President,
Luis López Guerra,
Nona Tsotsoria, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 March 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Gheorghe Medeşan, is a Romanian national who was born in 1945 and lives in Darlos. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Ms Irina Cambrea, Co-Agent of the Government.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the quashing of his final decision by means of an extraordinary appeal.
On 26 July 2011 and 19 August 2011 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Romania in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 2,515 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, converted into Romanian lei at the rate applicable on the date of payment, 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 undertook 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 LAW
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).
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.
Marialena TsirliAlvina Gyulumyan
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy