FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 417/10
by Lea Anneli LEINO
against Finland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 7 September 2010 as a Committee composed of:
	David Thór Björgvinsson, President,
	Päivi Hirvelä,
	Mihai Poalelungi, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 December 2009,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Ms Lea Anneli Leino, a Finnish national who was born in 1941 and lives in Hämeenlinna. She was represented before the Court by Ms Leena Vänniä, a lawyer practising in Hämeenlinna. The Finnish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Arto Kosonen of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs.
The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the length of her civil proceedings and the lack of a domestic remedy with regard to the length.
On 7 May 2010 and 31 May 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against the Finland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 4,500 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which 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 § 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 undertook 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 would 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 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 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	David Thór Björgvinsson
	Deputy Registrar	President