FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 42823/05
by Irina SEKT
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 22 September 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Karel Jungwiert,
Rait Maruste,
Mark Villiger,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
Mykhaylo Buromenskiy, ad hoc judge,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 24 November 2005,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Irina Sekt, is an American national who was born in 1936 and lives in Arlington. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yu. Zaytsev.
On 7 January 2009 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint under Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 concerning the lack of an ordinary appeal procedure in the customs’ offence proceedings. The applicant also relied on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.
On 5 and 7 August 2009 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 300 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into the national currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum would 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 Government further accepted that this application raised an issue similar to the one in which the Court had found a violation of Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 in the case of Gurepka v. Ukraine (no. 61406/00, § 61-62, 6 September 2005), and they undertook to publish the decision adopted by the Court in the context of a friendly settlement in the present case. The payment of the sum mentioned above and the publication of this decision in an official publication would 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 public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine 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.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy