CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 3 juin 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 } .sC702907E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; 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. 10823/05 by Paul STASCH against Germany The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 3   June   2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Rait Maruste,   Karel Jungwiert,   Renate Jaeger,   Mark Villiger,   Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,   Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 March 2005, Having regard to the Court’s decision to examine jointly the admissibility and merits of the case (Article 29 § 3 of the Convention), Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having regard to the partial decision of 16 October 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Paul Stasch, is a German national who was born in 1926 and lives in Berlin. He was represented before the Court by Mr K.H. Christoph, a lawyer practising in Berlin. The German Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs A. Wittling-Vogel, Ministerialdirigentin , of the Federal Ministry of Justice. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 1.     First set of proceedings On 3 June, 11 October and 27 November 1991, the Federal Insurance Fund for Salaried Employees ( Bundesversicherungsanstalt für Angestellte ) calculated the applicant’s pension claims. On 8 December 1992 the applicant brought an action in the Berlin Social Court. On 9 January 1995 the Berlin Social Court rejected the applicant’s action. On 23 April 1997 the Berlin Social Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal. On 3 August 1999 the Federal Social Court partially quashed the Social Court of Appeal’s judgment. On 16 November 2004 the Federal Constitutional Court refused to admit the applicant’s constitutional complaint. 2.     Second set of proceedings On 13 March 1995 and 30 June 1997 the Insurance Fund recalculated the applicant’s pension claims. On 18 September 1997 the Insurance Fund rejected the applicant’s objection. On 26 September 1997 the applicant brought an action in the Berlin Social Court which was rejected on 6 May 2005. The proceedings on the applicant’s appeal appear to be still pending before the Berlin-Brandenburg Social Court of Appeal. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings before the domestic courts. THE LAW On 9 April 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government signed on 9 April 2008: “I, Mrs Almut Wittling-Vogel, Agent of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, declare that the Government of Germany offer to pay ex gratia 6,500 euros to Mr Paul Stasch 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 and 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. As far as it regards the length of the proceedings pending before the Berlin-Brandenburg Social Court of Appeal (file no. L 6 R 463/05) it concerns only the period until the date on which the parties conclude the present friendly settlement.” On 30 April 2008 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s counsel on 9 April 2008: “I, Mr Karl-Heinz Christoph, legal counsel, note that the Government of Germany are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of 6,500 euros to Mr Paul Stasch 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 and 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 Germany in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case. As far as it regards the length of the proceedings pending before the Berlin-Brandenburg Social Court of Appeal (file no. L 6 R 463/05) it concerns only the period until the date on which the parties conclude the present friendly settlement.” 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