CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 19 septembre 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sFEE8C148 { width:13.68pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s3CA6E042 { width:12.35pt; display:inline-block } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s25F5CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s31EEE7E5 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150% } .sE1E7ECA { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:21.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.05pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s1C195E1D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; line-height:150%; font-size:10pt } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA1F2F52E { width:32.21pt; display:inline-block } .s9D5ED0F7 { width:218.78pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION   FINAL DECISION Application no. 68756/01 by Jan BARTOSIEWICZ against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 19   September 2006 as a Chamber composed of:   Sir   Nicolas Bratza , President ,   Mr   J. Casadevall ,   Mr   G. Bonello ,   Mr   K. Traja ,   Mr   S. Pavlovschi ,   Mr   L. Garlicki ,   Ms   L. Mijović, judges , and Mr T.L. Early , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 January 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 deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Jan Bartosiewicz, is a Polish national who was born in 1969 and lives in Warszawa. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Jakub Wołąsiewicz. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant was detained on 7 September 1992. On 3 April 1997 the first hearing was held before the Warsaw Regional Court. Subsequent hearings were held in 1997 (15 October), in 1998 (12   January, 4 March, 6 May, 21 December), in 1999 (11 January, 18   March, 21 April, 9 June, 17 August, 2 September, 27 September, 22   October, 25 November, 28 December) and in 2000 (16 February, 14   March, 17 April, 11 May, 29 May, 20 June, 5 July, 22 August, 26   September, 30 October). On 3 November 2000 the Warsaw Regional Court gave a judgment by which it found the applicant guilty of committing inter alia the offence of aggravated assault and sentenced him to three and a half years’ imprisonment. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the excessive length of the proceedings in his case. THE LAW On 18 July 2006 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “I, Jakub Wołąsiewicz, Agent of the Government before the ECHR, declare that the Government of Poland offer to pay 15.000 Polish zlotys to Mr Jan Bartosiewicz with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above—mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non - pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It wil1 be payables within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”   On 22 June 2006 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:   “I, Jan Bartosiewicz, note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of 15.000 Polish zlotys (3600 euros) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.   This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.   I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Poland in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”   On 4 August 2006 the applicant confirmed once again that he accepted the terms of the declaration. The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be 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.   T.L Early   Nicolas Bratza   Registrar   President