THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos. 13514/16 and 52735/20
Sokol SHETI against Albania
and Merita GJASHTA against Albania
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23 September 2021 as a Committee composed of:
Dmitry Dedov, President,
Peeter Roosma,
Andreas Zünd, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Ating Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the cases,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions were communicated to the Albanian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention (see the appended table).
The Court received the friendly-settlement declarations, signed by the parties, under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Albania in respect of the facts giving rise to these applications, subject to an undertaking by the Government to pay them the amounts detailed in the appended table. These amounts will be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the above-mentioned three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on them, 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 Government also undertake to ensure the enforcement of the domestic decisions under consideration in the cases concerned (see appended table) within the same three-month period, and to pay any costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings.
The payment and the enforcement of the domestic decisions in the cases concerned will constitute the final resolution of the cases.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
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 the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the applications.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 14 October 2021.
{signature_p_2}
Viktoriya Maradudina Dmitry Dedov
Acting Deputy Registrar President
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention
(non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions)
No.
Application no.
Date of introduction
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Other complaints under well-established case-law
Relevant domestic decision
Date of receipt of Government’s declaration
Date of receipt of Applicant’s declaration
Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage per applicant
(in euros)[1]
13514/16
05/03/2016
Sokol SHETI
1956
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions,
Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions as a result of the failure to enforce the judgment in the applicant’s favour.
Supreme Court’s decision no. 3670 of 03/11/2015
22/07/2021
15/07/2021
2,500
60743/16
06/10/2016
Merita GJASHTA
1958
Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions.
Supreme Court’s decision no. 01524/13 of 07/04/2016
22/07/2021
17/05/2021
2,100
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy