[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Aurel HRISTEA v Romania- 13947/06 [2012] ECHR 173 (10 January 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2012/173.html Cite as: [2012] ECHR 173

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 13947/06
Aurel HRISTEA
against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 10 January 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Ján Šikuta, President,
Ineta Ziemele,
Kristina Pardalos, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 April 2006,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Aurel Hristea, is a Romanian national who was born in 1953 and lives in Timisoara. His application was lodged on 5 April 2006. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Irina Cambrea, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

On 30 April 1998 the applicant brought civil proceedings against a third party seeking recognition of his status as heir and the subsequent partition of an inheritance. The final decision was rendered on 30 November 2005 by the Timişoara Court of Appeal, after a period of seven years and seven months for three levels of jurisdiction.

COMPLAINTS

Invoking Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicant complained of the length and the unfairness of the proceedings. He also complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention regarding his alleged property rights.

THE LAW

On 8 September 2011 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I declare that the Government of Romania offer to pay, ex gratia to Mr Aurel Hristea, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 1,900 euros (one thousand nine hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum, which is to cover all damages, will be converted into Romanian lei at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision 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.”

On 7 June 2011 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:

“I, Aurel Hristea, note that the Government of Romania are prepared to pay me ex gratia, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights, 1,900 euros (one thousand nine hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be converted into Romanian Lei at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision 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.

I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Romania in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”

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.

Marialena Tsirli Ján Šikuta
Deputy Registrar President