CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 22 février 2005

.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 } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s401C450A { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3B3A5DE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5CE78F0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:2pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s81834564 { margin-top:2pt; margin-bottom:4pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s6F401900 { margin-top:4pt; margin-bottom:4pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sE9477EAE { margin-top:4pt; margin-bottom:4pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:10pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s5E327769 { margin-top:4pt; margin-bottom:2pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sFF90FB00 { margin-top:2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s25F5CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s8BD2CFA4 { width:35.21pt; display:inline-block } .s4BD72CAE { width:215.81pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s8EB5F569 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super } .s4B8D41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:10pt } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 75530/01 by Václav FILIP against the Czech Republic The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 22   February 2005 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   J.-P. Costa , President ,   Mr   A.B. Baka ,   Mr   R. Türmen ,   Mr   K. Jungwiert ,   Mr   M. Ugrekhelidze ,   Mrs   A. Mularoni ,   Mrs   E. Fura-Sandström, judges , and Mrs S. Dollé , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 August 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 formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, 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 Václav Filip, is a Czech national who was born in 1950 and lives in Sušice. He was represented before the Court by Mr J.   Liška, a lawyer practising in Klatovy. The respondent Government were represented by their Agent, Mr V.A. Schorm. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 10 December 1997 the applicant lodged a civil action with the Chomutov District Court against Mr M. for unjust enrichment in the amount of CZK 120,000 (EUR 3,672). After the application had been communicated by the Court to the respondent Government, the District Court found out that the case-file had been lost. It was reconstituted with the assistance of the applicant's lawyer. On 7 September 2004 the District Court issued a payment order in favour of the applicant. COMPLAINT The applicant originally complained that the manner in which the District Court conducted the proceedings was not in compliance with the “reasonable time” requirement of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE LAW On 14 December 2004 the Court received the following declaration signed by both of the parties:   [Translation of the Government] “The Government of the Czech Republic, represented before the European Court of Human Rights by its Agent Mr. Vít Alexander Schorm (“the Government”), and Mr. Václav Filip (“the Applicant”), represented by his counsel Mr. Jaroslav Liška, declare that: 1. they have reached a friendly settlement of case No. 75530/01 [1] – Václav Filip v. the Czech Republic (“the Application”); 2. the Government will pay to the Applicant a total amount of 158   550 Czech crowns (in words “one hundred and fifty-eight thousand five hundred and fifty Czech crowns”) [about 5,231 euros], within three months from the date of the notification of the judgement delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) pursuant to Article 39 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”), to a bank account that the Applicant will specify to the Ministry of Justice without undue delay upon request; 3. the above-mentioned sum is to cover any damage that might have been caused to the Applicant by the Czech Republic through its authorities, including legal expenses; 4. if the above-mentioned amount is not paid within the designated time of three months from the date of the notification of the Court's judgment, then from the expiry date, a simple interest on the amount shall be paid at an annual rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points; 5. the Applicant waives any further claims against the Czech Republic based on the facts of the proceedings before the Court on the basis of the Application, and regards this friendly settlement as the final settlement of the Application; 6. neither the Government nor the Applicant will request that the case be referred to the Court's Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention after the delivery of the Court's judgement under Article 39 of the Convention.”   The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the further examination of the application (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 the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   S. Dollé   J.-P. Costa   Registrar   President [1] In the original text of the Declaration, the application number is incorrect.