FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 8411/04
by Ljubica MLINAREVIĆ and Mijo KAPOVIĆ
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 28 September 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrL. Loucaides,
MrsF. Tulkens,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrA. Kovler,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 April 2003,
Having regard to the decision to apply the procedure under 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 deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mrs Ljubica Mlinarević and Mr Mijo Kapović, are Croatian nationals who were born in 1938 and 1958, respectively, and live in Babina Greda. They were represented before the Court by Mr D. Štivić, a lawyer practising in Vukovar. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 7 May 1992 the Croatian Army temporarily seized the applicants’ house for military purposes.
On 17 December 1997 the Army returned the house to the applicants.
On 23 December 1997 the applicants brought a civil action against the State in the Županja Municipal Court (Općinski sud u Županji) seeking damages.
On 6 November 1999 the Amendments to the Civil Obligations Act (“the 1999 Amendments”) entered into force.
On 17 March 2000 the Municipal Court stayed the proceedings pursuant to the above legislation.
On 31 July 2003 new legislation on the liability of the State for damage caused by members of the Croatian Army and police in the performance of their official duties during the Homeland War entered into force (“the 2003 Liability Act”).
Pursuant to the 2003 Liability Act, on 17 October 2003 the Municipal Court decided to resume the proceedings.
On 17 November 2004 the Municipal Court gave judgment accepting the applicants’ claim in part. Both parties appealed.
On 14 November 2005 the Vukovar County Court (Županijski sud u Vukovaru) quashed the first-instance judgment and remitted the case.
In the resumed proceedings, on 30 January 2006 the Municipal Court again gave judgment accepting the applicants’ claim in part. The parties again appealed.
It appears that the proceedings are currently pending before the Vukovar County Court.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention that the enactment of the 1999 Amendments and the prolonged stay of the proceedings resulting thereof had violated their rights of access to a court and to an effective remedy.
THE LAW
By letter of 22 August 2006 the Government informed the Court that they accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement and that the Government would pay the applicants jointly 10,000 euros in full and final settlement of the case, costs and expenses included.
On 24 August 2006 the applicants’ representative informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the applicants waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application.
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 (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy