CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 15 septembre 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 } .s636D9C1 { width:38.55pt; display:inline-block } .s2999663D { width:158.72pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 10993/03 by Ante BOGDANOVIC against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 15   September 2005 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   P. Lorenzen ,   Mrs   N. Vajić ,   Mrs   S. Botoucharova ,   Mr   A. Kovler ,   Mrs   E. Steiner ,   Mr   K. Hajiyev, judges , and Mr S. Quesada , Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 November 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 formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr   Ante Bogdanović, is a Croatian national who was born in 1934 and lives in Blato na Cetini. He is represented before the Court by Mr M. Budimir, a lawyer practising in Split. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 28 September 1991 the applicant instituted civil proceedings in the Omiš Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Omišu ) seeking damages from the insurance company L. (“the company”). On 28 May 1992 the Omiš Municipal Court gave judgment in the applicant’s favour, awarding him the damages sought. The judgment was not served on the company, because its seat was in Serbia and Montenegro. On 10 October 2001 the Omiš Municipal Court sent its judgment to the Ministry of Justice, Administration and Local Self-Government ( Ministarstvo pravosuđa, uprave i lokalne samouprave ; “the Ministry”) with a view to service by diplomatic channels on the company. In reaction to repeated enquires and submissions by the applicant, on 19 September 2002 the court requested information from the Ministry as to why the service had not been performed. The applicant meanwhile filed a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ), complaining about the length of the proceedings. On 19 November 2003 the Constitutional Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint as ill-founded. It found that the Omiš Municipal Court undertook all possible actions to serve the judgment and that the delay in the proceedings had been a consequence of the disruption of diplomatic relations between Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro. In its view, this delay in the service of the judgment was not attributable to the court, but to objective circumstances. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6   §   1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings. THE LAW On 10 March 2005 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the applicant waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application. By letter of 31 March 2005 the Government informed the Court that they accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement and that the Government would pay the applicant 4,800 euros in full and final settlement of the applicant’s claim under the Convention, costs and expenses included. 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.   Santiago Quesada   Christos Rozakis Deputy Registrar   President