SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 62530/13
Dmitri SENATSKI
against the Republic of Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 11 October 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Nebojša Vučinić, President,
Valeriu Griţco,
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 26 September 2013,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Dmitri Senatski, is a Moldovan national, who was born in 1970 and lives in Chișinău. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Popescu, a lawyer practising in Cricova.
The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr M. Gurin.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the abusive quashing of an administrative decision in his favour.
On 11 August 2016 the Court received a friendly settlement agreement signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against the Republic of Moldova in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 3,500 (three thousand five hundred) euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into Moldovan lei at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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. 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
In the light of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.
Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 17 November 2016.
Hasan BakırcıNebojša Vučinić
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy