FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 5542/03
by S.A.COMBUSTIBIL SOLID
against Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 25 October 2005 as a Chamber composed of:
SirNicolas Bratza, President,
MrJ. Casadevall,
MrR. Maruste,
MrK. Traja,
MrS. Pavlovschi,
MrL. Garlicki,
MrJ. Borrego Borrego, judges,
and Mrs F. Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 December 2002,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, S. A. “Combustibil Solid”, is a company incorporated in Moldova. It is represented before the Court by Mr Vitalie Postolache.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
At the material time, the applicant was a corporation in which the State had a 78% shareholding. By its Decision No. 1061 of 17 November 1997 the Government obliged the applicant to purchase coal for local councils for a further distribution among the poor. For that purpose, the Government issued Decision No. 1166 of 17 December 1997, which obliged the Ministry of Finance to pay the applicant 4,000,000 American dollars (USD) for the coal.
The applicant purchased coal in the amount of USD 1,314,000.00. The Ministry of Finance paid the applicant only USD 524,100.00, but failed to pay the rest of the money.
In 1999 the applicant brought a civil action against the Ministry of Finance. By a final judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of 26 December 2001 the Ministry of Finance was ordered to pay the applicant USD 709,107.00.
The applicant obtained an enforcement warrant, which the Bailiff failed to enforce until 19 January 2004.
COMPLAINTS
1. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, that by reason of the non-enforcement of the judgment of 10 May 2001, its right to have its civil rights determined by a court within a reasonable period of time was violated.
2. The applicant also stated that because of the non-enforcement of the judgment of 10 May 2001 it was unable to enjoy its possessions and thus, its right to protection of property under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention was violated.
THE LAW
On 13 February 2004, the Government informed the Court that the parties had signed a friendly settlement agreement on 25 December 2003 and that the applicant had been paid 9,367,920.10 Moldovan lei (MDL). The Government submitted to the Court a copy of the agreement and a copy of a payment order of 19 January 2004, issued by the Ministry of Finance in respect of the applicant.
On 26 January 2004 the applicant informed the Court that the Government has paid it USD 709,107 and that it wished to discontinue the examination of the application and to have it struck out of the Court’s list of cases.
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 public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Françoise ELENS-PASSOSNicolas Bratza
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy