CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 27 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 } .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 } .sB8084949 { width:138.49pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .s2DF49AA6 { width:24.54pt; display:inline-block } .sD79BB263 { width:196.1pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 33784/05 by Jovan MILAK against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 27   September 2007 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   L. Loucaides ,   Mrs   N. Vajić ,   Mr   A. Kovler ,   Mrs   E. Steiner ,   Mr   S.E. Jebens ,   Mr   G. Malinverni, judges , and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 September 2005, 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 Jovan Milak, is a Croatian national who was born in 1952 and lives in Knin. He was represented before the Court by Mr   T.   Vukičević, a lawyer practising in Split. The Croatian Government were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant has been the owner of a family house in Knin where he had been living until 5   August 1995 when he left Croatia. On 31 January 1997 the local authorities issued a decision authorising a certain I.M. to use the applicant’s house temporarily. Following his return to Croatia, on 11 November 1998 the applicant applied for repossession of his property. On 30 October 2002 the competent Ministry set aside the local authorities’ decision of 31 January 1997 and decided that the property be returned to the applicant. However, it was only on 8 May 2003 that the applicant’s house was returned to him. On 24 June 2006 the applicant brought a civil action against the State in the Knin Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Kninu ) seeking compensation for the damage sustained in the period between 25   July 2000 and 8 May 2003, during which he was unable to use his property. On 4 November 2004 the Municipal Court accepted the applicant’s claim in part awarding him the compensation only for the period between 1   November 2002 and 7 May 2003. On 29 November 2004 the Šibenik County Court ( Županijski sud u Šibeniku ) dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the first-instance judgment. The applicant then lodged a constitutional complaint, which the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) dismissed on 6 July 2005. COMPLAINTS   1.     The applicant complained under Article   1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Article 8 thereof that the compensation received for the prolonged inability to use his house had been inadequate as it had not covered the period prior to 1   November 2002. 2.     He also complained under Article 14 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 thereto that, unlike other Croatian citizens, he had been entitled to receive only partial compensation for the loss resulting from the restrictions to his right of ownership. 3.     Lastly, the applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the outcome of the above civil proceedings. THE LAW By letter of 24 July 2007 the applicant informed the Court that he accepted a proposal for a friendly settlement and waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application. On 30 July 2007 the Government informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the Government would pay the applicant 6,000 euros in full and final settlement of the case, costs and expenses included. 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 (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.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President