FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 75179/11
Pavlo Pavlovych TRANDASIR
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting 9 April 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Angelika Nußberger, President,
André Potocki,
Aleš Pejchal, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 November 2011,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Pavlo Pavlovych Trandasir, a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1983 and lives in Kyiv. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. M. Lychyk, a lawyer practising in Kyiv. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of criminal proceedings. The applicant also referred to Articles 3, 5 §§ 3 and 5 of the Convention.
On 6 and 12 December 2012 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 him 5,000 (five thousand) euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into Ukrainian hryvnia at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1of 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 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
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).
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.
Stephen PhillipsAngelika Nußberger
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy