CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 16 octobre 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 } .s3CA6E042 { width:12.35pt; display:inline-block } .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 } .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 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s988562EE { width:30.55pt; display:inline-block } .s8C2BF086 { width:220.78pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 27303/04 by Dumitru APOSTOL against Moldova The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 16   October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   J. Casadevall , President ,   Mr   G. Bonello ,   Mr   S. Pavlovschi ,   Mr   L. Garlicki ,   Ms   L. Mijović ,   Mr   J. Šikuta ,   Mrs   P. Hirvelä, judges , and Mr T.L. Early , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 June 2004, 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 parties’ formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Dumitru Apostol, is a Moldovan national who was born in 1938 and lives in Varatic. He was represented before the Court by Mr Victor Marcu, a lawyer practising in Edineţ. The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Vladimir Grosu. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. In 1941 the applicant’s parents were persecuted by the communist authorities. Their property was confiscated and they were exiled to Siberia. In 1991 they were rehabilitated. On an unspecified date in November   2003 the applicant brought an action against the Râşcani Department of Finances, seeking compensation for the confiscation of his parents’ property. On 22   December   2003 the Râşcani District Court ruled in favour of the applicant and ordered the Ministry of Finance (“the Ministry”) to pay him 432,619 Moldovan lei (MDL) (the equivalent of 26,417 euros (EUR) at the time). The judgment was not appealed against and after fifteen days it became final and enforceable. Since the District Court ordered the Ministry to pay compensation whereas the Râşcani Department of Finances had been a party to the proceedings, the Ministry lodged an appeal against the judgment of 22   December 2003 only on 30   June 2004. On 21   October 2004 the Bălţi Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, quashed the judgment of the Râşcani District Court of 22   December 2003 and ordered a re-trial of the case before the first-instance court. On 18   March 2005 the Râşcani District Court ruled in favour of the applicant and ordered the Ministry of Finance to pay him MDL 260,165 (the equivalent of EUR 15,426 at the time) in compensation for the confiscated property. The applicant did not lodge an appeal against this judgment and after fifteen days it became final and enforceable. On 15   May 2006 the applicant sent the enforcement warrant to a Bailiff. The final judgment of 18   March 2005 has not been enforced to date. COMPLAINTS 1.     In his initial application, the applicant complained that the non-enforcement of the final judgment in his favour of 22   December   2003 had violated his rights under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention. 2.     On 21   June   2006 the applicant submitted that there had been a breach of the principle of legal certainty, as provided for by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, as a result of the quashing by the Bălţi Court of Appeal on 21   October   2004 of a final judgment in his favour. 3.     On 21   June   2006 he also submitted that the judgment of 18   March   2005 had not been enforced either. THE LAW On 27   July and 29   August 2007 the Court received from the parties two declarations according to which the Government had undertaken to pay the applicant, within three months from the date of the adoption of a strike-out decision by the Court, EUR   15,426 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the present case. In return, the applicant accepted the proposal and waived any further claims against Moldova in respect of the facts giving rise to the present application. The Court takes note of the declarations signed by 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 strike the application out of its list of cases.   T.L. Early   Josep Casadevall   Registrar   President