CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 29 avril 2008

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .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 } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDB6B63EE { width:176.94pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 579/03 by Penka Georgieva KARAMANOVA against Bulgaria The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 29 April 2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Snejana Botoucharova,   Karel Jungwiert,   Volodymyr Butkevych,   Rait Maruste,   Mark Villiger,   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 December 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, Ms Penka Georgieva Karamanova, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1960 and lives in Plovdiv. She was represented before the Court by Mrs S.H. Stefanova and Mr E. Ekimdzhiev, lawyers practising in Plovdiv. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Dimova, of the Ministry of Justice. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 20 November 1996 an investigator conducted a search and seizure at the applicant’s home in relation to an alleged fraud. On 21 November 1996 the investigation authorities opened a preliminary investigation against the applicant for fraud. On 24 July, 29 August and 17 October 2002 the applicant was questioned. A bill of indictment for fraud was prepared on 7 March 2003 which was filed on an unspecified date with the Plovdiv District Court. On 23 December 2003 the applicant and the prosecution concluded a plea bargain agreement which was approved on the same day by the District Court. COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention of the excessive length of the criminal proceedings and the alleged lack of effective remedies in that respect. THE LAW On 20 September 2007 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s legal counsel: “I, Snezhana Stefanova, lawyer, note that the Government of Bulgaria are prepared to pay the sum of 3,300 euros to Ms Penka Georgieva Karamanova 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 non-pecuniary damage as well as 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. 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 Bulgaria in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.” The applicant expressed a preference concerning a particular repartition of the amount between her and her legal representatives. The Court considers that this is an internal matter between them. On 4 March 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “The Government of Bulgaria offer to pay 3,300 euros to Ms   Penka   Georgieva   Karamanova 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 non-pecuniary damage as well as 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. 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. 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). In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and to strike the case 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