FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 50242/06
by Yevgeniya Mykolayivna KARPENKO
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5 October 2010 as a Committee composed of:
	Rait Maruste, President,
	Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
	Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 November 2006,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Ms Yevgeniya Mykolayivna Karpenko, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1979 and lives in Zhytomyr. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev.
The application mainly concerned the length of the proceedings in the applicant's civil case. The applicant invoked Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention.
On 21 August and 26 October 2009 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 her 600 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into 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 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 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 nopublic policy 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.
	Stephen Phillips	Rait Maruste
	Deputy Registrar	President