FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 52771/08
by Toby NEALE
against the United Kingdom
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 1 December 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
and Fatoş Aracı, ,
   Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 October 2008,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Toby Neale, is a British national who was born in 1963 and lives in Ballabeg, Isle of Man. He was represented before the Court by Russell Jones & Walker, a firm of lawyer based in Manchester. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr D. Walton, of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention of unlawful interception of his telecommunications and ineffective regulation and independent oversight of the interception of communications on the Isle of Man. He further complained that the Interception of Communications Tribunal did not comply with Article 6. Finally, he complained under Article 13 that he did not have access to an effective remedy in respect of his complaints.
On 16 September 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Derek Walton, Agent for the Government of the United Kingdom, declare that the Government of the United Kingdom offer to pay EUR 25,000 (twenty-five thousand euros) to Mr Toby Neale 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 and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be fully inclusive of all taxes and in full and final settlement of all the applicant’s claims before the Court. 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 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.”
 In addition, the Government acknowledged that, insofar as the Interception of Communications Tribunal concluded that there had been a contravention of sections 2 to 5 of the Interception of Communications Act 1988 in the applicant ’s case, any interferences with the applicant’s Article 8 § 1 rights in reliance on interception warrants so issued were not “in accordance with the law” for the purposes of Article 8 § 2 of the Convention.
On 19 October 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the applicant:
“We, Russell Jones & Walker, solicitors, note that the Government of the United Kingdom are prepared to pay the sum of EUR 25,000 (twenty-five thousand euros) to Mr Toby Neale 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 and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be fully inclusive of all taxes and in full and final settlement of all the applicant’s claims before the Court. 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.
Having consulted my client, I would inform you that he accepts the proposal and waives any further claims against the United Kingdom in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. He declares that this constitutes a 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 reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).
In 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.
	Fatoş Aracı	Lech Garlicki
	Deputy Registrar	President