CEDH · CASELAW;REPORTS;ENG — 5 mars 1996

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                        EUROPEAN COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS                               SECOND CHAMBER                            Application No. 19819/92                                Jostein STØRKSEN                                     against                                     Norway                              REPORT OF THE COMMISSION                          (adopted on 5 March 1996)                                TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                      Page     INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1     PART I   :   STATEMENT OF THE FACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3     PART II :   SOLUTION REACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4                                  INTRODUCTION     1.     This Report relates to the application introduced under Article 25 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by Jostein Størksen against Norway on 17 October 1991.   It was registered on 10 April 1992 under file No. 19819/92.   2.     The applicant was represented by Mr. Knut Rognlien, a lawyer practising in Oslo.   3.     The Government of Norway were represented by their acting Agent, Ms. Kristine Ryssdal of the Solicitor General's Office.   4.     On 5 July 1994 the Commission (Second Chamber) decided to adjourn its examination of the applicant's complaint under Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention relating to the length of the proceedings and declared inadmissible the remainder of the application. On 29 November 1995 the Commission declared admissible the complaint concerning the length of the proceedings. It then proceeded to carry out its task under Article 28 para. 1 of the Convention which provides as follows:         "In the event of the Commission accepting a petition       referred to it:         a.    it shall, with a view to ascertaining the facts,       undertake together with the representatives of the parties       an examination of the petition and, if need be, an       investigation, for the effective conduct of which the       States concerned shall furnish all necessary facilities,       after an exchange of views with the Commission;         b.    it shall at the same time place itself at the disposal       of the parties concerned with a view to securing a friendly       settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for Human       Rights as defined in this Convention."   5.     The Commission found that the parties had reached a friendly settlement of the case and on 5 March 1996 it adopted this Report, which, in accordance with Article 28 para. 2 of the Convention, is confined to a brief statement of the facts and of the solution reached.   6.     The following members were present when the Report was adopted:              Mr.    H. DANELIUS, President            Mrs.   G.H. THUNE            MM.    G. JÖRUNDSSON                  J.-C. SOYER                  H.G. SCHERMERS                  F. MARTINEZ                  L. LOUCAIDES                  J.-C. GEUS                  M.A. NOWICKI                  I. CABRAL BARRETO                  J. MUCHA                  D. SVÁBY                  P. LORENZEN                                     PART I                           STATEMENT OF THE FACTS   7.     On 30 January 1985, the applicant instituted proceedings in the City Court of Oslo (Oslo Byrett) against the Norwegian State represented by the Ministry of Fisheries claiming that the Ministry was obliged to grant him a fishing licence for a certain vessel. He also claimed damages for alleged loss of income related to the dispute concerning the fishing licence.   8.     By judgment of 28 July 1987 the City Court found for the Ministry and costs were awarded against the applicant. This judgment was upheld on appeal by the Eidsivating High Court (Eidsivating Lagmannsrett) by judgment of 6 July 1990. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court (Høyesterett) was refused on 10 April 1991. The applicant was informed thereof on 18 April 1991.   9.     Before the Commission the applicant complained, under Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention, of the length of the above proceedings.                                     PART II                              SOLUTION REACHED   10.    Following the decision on the admissibility of the application of 29 November 1995, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to securing a friendly settlement in accordance with Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention and invited the parties to submit any proposals they wished to make.   11.    In accordance with the usual practice, the Chamber Secretary, acting on the Commission's instructions, contacted the parties to explore the possibilities of reaching a friendly settlement.   12.    By letter of 8 February 1996 the parties submitted the following agreement reached between them:         "We would like to inform you that the parties have reached       a friendly settlement.         The parties have agreed as follows:         1.    Without admitting that there has been any violation of            the Convention, the Government has decided to pay the            applicant ex gratia NOK 20,000.         2.    The Government will cover NOK 15,000 of the            applicant's costs for the Commission.         3.    The applicant will withdraw his application from the            Commission and undertake not to institute any            subsequent proceedings in this matter.         On behalf of the Government            On behalf of the applicant         (signed)                               (signed)       Kristine Ryssdal                       Knut Rognlien       advocate                               advocate"   13.    At its session on 5 March 1996, the Commission noted that the parties had reached an agreement regarding the terms of a settlement.   14.    It further considered, having regard to Article 28 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, that the friendly settlement of the case had been secured on the basis of respect for Human Rights as defined in the Convention.   15.    For these reasons, the Commission adopted the present Report.     Secretary to the Second Chamber         President of the Second Chamber         (M.-T. SCHOEPFER)                          (H. DANELIUS)