CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 3 mars 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 } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3B3A5DE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sE5338F84 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; 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 } .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 DECISION Application no. 16319/02 by Strahinja ĐURIČIĆ against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3   March   2005 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   L. Loucaides ,   Mr   P. Lorenzen ,   Mrs   N. Vajić ,   Mr   K. Hajiyev ,   Mr   D. Spielmann ,   Mr   S.E. Jebens, judges , and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 April 2002, 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 respondent Government's letter dated 8   November   2004, and letter of the representative of the applicant's heir dated 25   August   2004, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Strahinja Đuričić, deceased during the course of the proceedings. His spouse, Mrs Zorka Đuričić, expressed her wish to proceed with the application. She is a Croatian national and lives in Bjelovar, Croatia. The applicant was represented before the Court by Mr M. Mihočević, a lawyer practising with Nobilo-Mlinarić Chambers, Zagreb. The respondent Government were represented by their Agents, Ms   L.   Lukina-Karajković and Ms   S.   Stažnik. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 18 April 1992 the applicant's cottage was destroyed by unknown perpetrators. On 19 September 1994 the applicant instituted civil proceedings in the Bjelovar Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Bjelovaru ), seeking compensation for his destroyed property from the State. On 17 January 1996 Parliament introduced an amendment to the Civil Obligations Act ( Zakon o izmjeni zakona o obveznim odnosima , Official Gazette no.   7/1996; “the 1996 Amendments”). It provided that all proceedings concerning actions for damages resulting from terrorist acts were to be stayed pending the enactment of new legislation. On 7 March 1996 the court stayed the proceedings pursuant to the above legislation. On 14 July 2003 Parliament introduced the Act on Liability for Damage Resulting from Terrorist Acts and Public Demonstrations ( Zakon o odgovornosti za štetu nastalu uslijed terorističkih akata i javnih demonstracija , Official Gazette no. 117/2003; “the 2003 Liability Act”). On 4 December 2003 the proceedings were resumed. However, the Bjelovar Municipal Court found that it had no jurisdiction in the matter and dismissed the applicant's claim as inadmissible. On 29 April 2004 the Bjelovar County Court ( Županijski sud u Bjelovaru ) upheld that decision and dismissed the applicant's appeal. COMPLAINT The applicant maintained that Parliament's enactment of the 1996 legislation interfered with his right of access to a court within the meaning of Article 6   §   1 of the Convention. THE LAW By letter of 8 November 2004 the Government informed the Court that they accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement and that the Government would pay the applicant's heir 6,000 euros in full and final settlement of the applicant's claim under the Convention, costs and expenses included. On 25 August 2004 the representative of the applicant's heir informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the applicant's heir waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties (Article 39 of the Convention) and considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) 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 Rule 62   §   3 of the Rules of Court). Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention to the case should be discontinued and the case struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention. Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President