FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 38425/09
Ivo MLÁTILÍK
against the Czech Republic
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 22 January 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Angelika Nußberger, President,
André Potocki,
Aleš Pejchal, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 July 2009,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Ivo Mlátilík, is a Czech national, who was born in 1961 and lives in Františkovy Lázně.
The Czech Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr V.A. Schorm, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention of the length of the proceedings to which he was a party.
On 6 and 23 November 2012 respectively the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against the Czech Republic in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 2,000 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into Czech korunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that might be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. 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 the 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. 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 in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Stephen PhillipsAngelika Nußberger
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy