CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 3 juin 2004

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .sF604F523 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .s145CCEB3 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s377C1984 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .s588BDBF1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s2DF49AA6 { width:24.54pt; display:inline-block } .s6AC2EB63 { width:201.8pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION FINAL DECISION Application no. 76668/01 by Boris BEČ against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3   June   2004 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   P. Lorenzen ,   Mr   G. Bonello ,   Mrs   F. Tulkens ,   Mrs   N. Vajić ,   Mrs   S. Botoucharova ,   Mr   V. Zagrebelsky, judges , and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 October 2001, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having regard to the partial decision of 13 February 2003, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Boris Beč, is a Croatian national, who was born in 1966 and lives in Zagreb. He was represented before the Court by Ms Ines Bilandžić Arbutina, a lawyer practising in Garešnica, Croatia. The respondent Government were represented by their Agent, Ms Lidija Lukina-Karajković. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 14 March 1993 a house in Popovac, Croatia, which belonged to M.B. was blown up by unknown perpetrators. On 27 January 1995 M.B. instituted civil proceedings before the Garešnica Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Garešnici ) seeking damages from the Republic of Croatia for her damaged property. On 3 February 1996 the Civil Obligations (Amendments) Act 1996 ( Zakon o izmjeni Zakona o obveznim odnosima , Official Gazette no. 7/1996, hereinafter “the 1996 Act”) entered into force. It provided that all proceedings concerning actions for damages resulting from terrorist acts were to be stayed pending the enactment of new legislation on the subject. On 8 February 1996 the Garešnica Municipal Court stayed the proceedings pursuant to the 1996 Act. On 16 February 1996 the applicant acquired ownership over the M.B.'s house and thus became her legal successor in the proceedings before the Garešnica Municipal Court. Pursuant to the Damage from Terrorist Acts and Public Demonstrations Act 2003 ( Zakon o odgovornosti za štetu nastalu uslijed terorističkih akata i javnih demonstracija , Official Gazette no. 117/2003), the proceedings before the Garešnica Municipal Court resumed on an unspecified date. COMPLAINT The applicant complained that the enactment of the 1996 Act violated his right of access to court guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE LAW On 1 March 2004 the Government and the applicant submitted formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case whereby the Government would pay the amount of 6,000 euros to the applicant and he would withdraw the application waiving any further claims against Croatia in respect of the application. The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties (Article 39 of the Convention) and considers that the matter has been resolved (Article 37 § 1 of the Convention). It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, the application to the case of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be discontinued and the case struck out of its list of cases. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention; and Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President