FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 2494/05
by Slavcho KOSTADINOV
against Bulgaria
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 4 May 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
and ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 December 2004,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Mr Slavcho Kostadinov, a Bulgarian national who was born in 1941 and lives in Sofia. He was represented before the Court by Ms S. Lyubenova-Neykova, a lawyer practising in Sofia. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Kotseva, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained, in particular, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of the length of a set of civil proceedings to which he had been a party.
On 22 September 2008 the Court communicated to the Government the complaint concerning the length of proceedings.
On 13 May 2009 and 25 February 2010 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Bulgaria in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 1,600 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Bulgarian levs at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be free of any taxes that might be chargeable to the applicant. 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 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.
	Claudia Westerdiek	Peer Lorenzen
	Registrar	President