THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 2857/13
Igor Olegovich PUSHKAREV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14 March 2017 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
Pere Pastor Vilanova,
Alena Poláčková, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 November 2012,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to this declaration,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Igor Olegovich Pushkarev, is a Russian national, who was born in 1986 and lives in St Petersburg. He was represented before the Court by Mr I. Panchenko, a lawyer practising in St Petersburg.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 4 about excessively long examination of his appeal against a detention order.
On 27 April 2016 the applicant’s complaint was communicated to the Government.
By letter of 15 September 2016 the Government informed the Court that they propose to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the applicant. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.
In their declaration the Government acknowledged that the review of the lawfulness of the applicant’s pre-trial detention was incompatible with the “speediness” requirement of Article 5 § 4 and stated their readiness to pay EUR 1,500 to the applicant as just satisfaction.
The remainder of their declaration provided as follows:
“The sum referred to above, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. 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 undertake 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.
This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
In his letter of 18 October 2016 the applicant informed the Court that he agreed to the terms of the Government’s declaration.
THE LAW
The Court considers that the applicant’s agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government shall be considered as a friendly settlement between the parties (see Bakal and Others v. Turkey (dec.), no. 8243/08, 5 June 2012 and Cēsnieks v. Latvia (dec.), no. 9278/06, § 34, 6 March 2012).
The Court therefore takes note of the said 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 applications.
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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 6 April 2017.
Fatoş AracıHelen Keller
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy