SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 48668/06
by Şener ŞENTÜRK
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28 September 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Danutė Jočienė, President,
Nona Tsotsoria,
Guido Raimondi, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 December 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Mr Şener Şentürk, a Turkish national, who was born in 1965 and lives in Adana. He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Aktay, a lawyer practising in Mersin. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
On 4 September 2009 the Court decided to communicate the applicant's complaints concerning the length of the civil proceedings which began on 26 June 2001 and ended on 20 March 2006.
On 27 May 2010 and 1 July 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him EUR 2,500 (two thousand five hundred euros) to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Turkish liras 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 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 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 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.
Françoise Elens-PassosDanutė Jočienė
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy