CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 9 juillet 1997

.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 }                          Application No. 30157/96                       by Sven SÄTTERLUND                       against Sweden           The European Commission of Human Rights (Second Chamber) sitting in private on 9 July 1997, the following members being present:              Mrs.   G.H. THUNE, President            MM.    J.-C. GEUS                  G. JÖRUNDSSON                  A. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                  J.-C. SOYER                  H. DANELIUS                  F. MARTINEZ                  M.A. NOWICKI                  I. CABRAL BARRETO                  J. MUCHA                  D. SVÁBY                  P. LORENZEN                  E. BIELIUNAS                  E.A. ALKEMA                  A. ARABADJIEV              Ms.    M.-T. SCHOEPFER, Secretary to the Chamber           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;         Having regard to the application introduced on 11 December 1995 by Sven SÄTTERLUND against Sweden and registered on 9 February 1996 under file No. 30157/96;         Having regard to the reports provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;         Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government on 27 May 1997 and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant on 19 June 1997;         Having deliberated;         Decides as follows:   THE FACTS         The applicant, a Swedish citizen born in 1957, resides in Råda. Before the Commission he is represented by Mr. Carl-Gustaf Elwe, a lawyer practising in Karlskoga.         In 1994 the applicant instituted court proceedings against the mother of his son, claiming extended access to the son.   By judgment of 8 February 1995, the District Court (tingsrätten) of Sunne awarded the applicant only limited access.   In so deciding, the court relied, inter alia, on two reports from the Social Council (socialnämnden) of Hagfors.   The first report, dated 11 April 1994, had been prepared by Ann-Christine Månsson, who had worked as a substitute social welfare officer at the Social Council until 24 July 1994.   On 28 June 1995, upon the applicant's appeal, the Court of Appeal (hovrätten) for Western Sweden upheld the District Court's judgment.   The appellate court was composed of five members, including the lay assessor (nämndeman) Ann-Christine Månsson.         The applicant claims that the lay assessor Ann-Christine Månsson cannot be considered as impartial due to her previous involvement in the case.   He invokes Article 6 of the Convention.         On 15 January 1997 the Commission (Second Chamber) decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government pursuant to Rule 48 para. 2 (b) of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.         By letter of 27 May 1997, the Government informed the Commission that a friendly settlement agreement had been reached between the parties.   The terms of the agreement are as follows:   (Translation)         "1.   The Government will pay [the applicant] compensation       of 45,000 Swedish crowns (SEK), of which 30,000 in non-       pecuniary damage and 15,000 for legal costs. ...         2.    [The applicant] declares that, after receiving the       amount under 1 above, he has no further claims on the       Swedish State based on the circumstances covered by his       application to the Commission.         3.    The parties agree that [the applicant's] application       to the Commission may be struck out of the Commission's       list of cases."         The agreement was signed by the Government's representative on 25 April 1997 and by the applicant on 29 April.   It was approved by the Government by decision of 15 May.         By letter of 19 June 1997, the applicant informed the Commission that he had received the above compensation amount and stated that, accordingly, the case may be struck out of the Commission's list of cases.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION         Having regard to Article 30 para. 1 (b) of the Convention, the Commission finds that the matter has been resolved.   Furthermore, in accordance with Article 30 para. 1 in fine, the Commission finds no circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application.         For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,         DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.          M.-T. SCHOEPFER                            G.H. THUNE          Secretary                                President    to the Second Chamber                    of the Second Chamber