FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 21163/10
by Valentina PAVLOVA
against Estonia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 31 January 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Julia Laffranque, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 March 2010,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Ms Valentina Pavlova, an Estonian national who was born in 1945 and lives in Narva. The Estonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Kuurberg, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the civil proceedings in her case. She also complained under the same provision of unfairness and outcome of the proceedings and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the domestic courts’ failure to protect her property rights.
On 30 November 2010 and 5 January 2011 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Estonia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 4,000 euros plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant. It will be 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 (Article 37 § 1 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.
Stephen PhillipsMirjana Lazarova Trajkovska
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy