BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Istvanne HARCZ v Hungary - 47833/06 [2009] ECHR 1366 (1 September 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/1366.html Cite as: [2009] ECHR 1366 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
47833/06
by Istvánné HARCZ
against Hungary
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 1 September 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Françoise
Tulkens,
President,
Ireneu
Cabral Barreto,
Vladimiro
Zagrebelsky,
Danutė
Jočienė,
Dragoljub
Popović,
András
Sajó,
Nona
Tsotsoria,
judges,
and Sally
Dollé, Section
Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 October 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mrs Istvánné Harcz, is a Hungarian national who was born in 1939 and lives in Budapest. The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr L. Höltzl, Agent, Ministry of Justice and Law Enforcement.
Invoking Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, the applicant complained to the Court about the length of civil proceedings involving a compensation dispute to which she was a party. These proceedings had lasted seven years and seven months before three levels of jurisdiction, including a remittal.
THE LAW
On 23 June 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Agent of the Government:
“I declare that the Government of Hungary offer to pay 5,600 euros to Mrs Istvánné Harcz with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into the national currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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 undertake 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.”
On 23 June 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:
“I note that the Government of Hungary are prepared to pay me the sum of 5,600 euros with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into the national currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and 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. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.”
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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and 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.
Sally Dollé Françoise Tulkens
Registrar President