THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 3505/12
REALINVEST, S.R.O.
against Slovakia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14 May 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Luis López Guerra, President,
Ján Šikuta,
Nona Tsotsoria, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 February 2012,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, REALINVEST, s.r.o., is a limited liability company with its registered office in Dolný Kubín. It was represented before the Court by Mr R. Slamka, a lawyer practising in Dolný Kubín.
The Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Pirošíková.
The applicant company complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings.
On 12 November 2013 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant company agreed to waive any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay it 1,700 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses. This sum will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and 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.
Marialena TsirliLuis López Guerra
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy