FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 39266/13
László TASI
against Hungary
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 10 April 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Faris Vehabović, President,
Carlo Ranzoni,
Péter Paczolay, judges,
and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 June 2013,
Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 25 May 2017 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant’s reply to that declaration,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr László Tasi, is a Hungarian national, who was born in 1967 and lives in Kecskemét. He was represented before the Court by Mr D.A. Karsai, a lawyer practising in Budapest.
2. The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Z. Tallódi, Agent, Ministry of Justice.
3. The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings to which he was a party.
4. After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, by letter dated 25 May 2017 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the application.
5. They acknowledged a violation of the applicant’s rights guaranteed by Article 6 of the Convention. They undertook to pay the applicant’s 800 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into the national currency 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. They further requested the Court to strike out the application.
6. On 3 July 2017, the Court received a letter from the applicant informing the Court that he had agreed to the terms of the Government’s declaration.
THE LAW
7. The Court finds that following the applicant’s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government the case should be treated as a friendly settlement between the parties.
8. It therefore 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 reasons to justify a continued examination of the application. 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 pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention.
Done in English and notified in writing on 3 May 2018.
Andrea TamiettiFaris Vehabović
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy