CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 4 septembre 2007

.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 } .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 } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s434D37A9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s2A91C753 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; 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 } .sA79CBE53 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-after:avoid } .s28D23796 { width:20.54pt; display:inline-block } .s64C69EF9 { width:181.43pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 74481/01 by Nikolay Atanasov PIRYANKOV against Bulgaria The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 4   September 2007 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   P. Lorenzen , President ,   Mrs   S. Botoucharova ,   Mr   V. Butkevych ,   Mrs   M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska ,   Mr   R. Maruste ,   Mr   J. Borrego Borrego ,   Mrs   R. Jaeger, judges , and Ms C. Westerdiek , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 April 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 Nikolay Atanasov Piryankov, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1978 and lives in Plovdiv. He is represented before the Court by Ms E. Nedeva, a lawyer practising in Plovdiv. The respondent Government were represented by their Agents, Ms   M.   Pasheva and Ms M. Kotzeva, of the Ministry of Justice. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. Between 7 September and 9 October 1996 the applicant was questioned several times in the Hisar Police Station in respect of a series of thefts committed on 6 and 7 September 1996. On 9 October 1996 a preliminary investigation was opened against the applicant and two other individuals. They were suspected of having stolen a car, two car batteries, several spanners and screwdrivers, a fire extinguisher, fishing tackle and other similar chattels. The case file was then transferred to the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office. On 8, 15 and 16 February 2001 the applicant and his co-accused were charged with the above offences and questioned. On an unspecified date, charges were also brought against a fourth individual. On 10 April 2002 the results of the investigation were presented to the applicant. On 13 April 2001 the investigation was concluded and the case was transmitted to the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office. On 20 June 2001 the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office submitted an indictment to the Plovdiv District Court. The first hearing, scheduled for 16 November 2001, was postponed because the applicant had not been timely served with a copy of the indictment. On 18 March 2002 the Plovdiv District Court remitted the case to the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office with instructions to correct certain deficiencies in the charges against the applicant and the co-accused, and the indictment. On 10 April 2002 the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office remitted the case to the Plovdiv Investigation Service. On 25 and 26 April 2002 the charges against the applicant and the co ‑ accused were amended. On 30 April 2002 the results of the investigation were presented to the applicant. On 11 July 2002 the Plovdiv District Prosecutor’s Office submitted a new indictment against the applicant and the co-accused to the Plovdiv District Court. The Plovdiv District Court scheduled eight hearings between July 2002 and August 2006. Five of them were adjourned because certain defendants were ill or absent, two hearings failed to take place because the lawyers of certain defendants were ill or busy with other criminal proceedings and one hearing was postponed in order to allow the collection of certain evidence. There were also difficulties in obtaining the attendance of certain witnesses   – on several occasions the court ordered the police to bring them by force and imposed fines for their absences. The next hearing before the Plovdiv District Court was scheduled for 12   October 2006. The Court has been informed of no further developments in the criminal proceedings. COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against him and under Article   13 of the Convention about the lack of effective remedies in this respect. THE LAW On 3 April 2007 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s counsel: “I, Emilia Nedeva Nedeva, lawyer, note that the Government of Bulgaria are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of 6,500 euros to Mr Nikolay Atanasov Piryankov 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 5,500 euros in respect of any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as 1,000 euros for costs and expenses, will be converted into Bulgarian lev at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. The part concerning costs and expenses, in the amount of 1,000 euros, will be paid directly into my bank account and the amount of 5,500 euros will be paid to the applicant. The whole sum 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 Bulgaria in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.” On 26 June 2007 the Court received the following declaration from the Government, which had been approved by the Council of Ministers of Bulgaria with Decision no. 433 of 22 June 2007 and had been signed by their Agent, Ms M. Kotzeva, of the Ministry of Justice: “The Government of Bulgaria offer to pay ex gratia 6,500 euros to Mr   Nikolay   Atanasov   Piryankov 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 5,500 euros in respect of any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as 1,000 euros for costs and expenses, will be converted into Bulgarian lev at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. The part concerning costs and expenses, in the amount of 1,000 euros, will be paid directly into the applicant’s lawyer’s bank account and the amount of 5,500 euros will be paid to the applicant. The whole sum 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. 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.” 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 public policy 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 strike the application out of its list of cases.   Claudia Westerdiek   Peer Lorenzen   Registrar   President