CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 3 juillet 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 } .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 } .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 } .s507451D6 { width:4.53pt; display:inline-block } .s4A0CEAF8 { width:194.77pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 41440/05 by Milan SAVIĆ against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 July 2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Christos Rozakis, President,   Nina Vajić,   Khanlar Hajiyev,   Dean Spielmann,   Sverre Erik Jebens,   Giorgio Malinverni,   George Nicolaou, judges, and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 November 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 deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Milan Savić, is a Croatian national who was born in 1949 and lives in Werl, Germany. He was represented before the Court by Mrs   S.   Čanković, an advocate practising in Zagreb. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs   Š.   Stažnik The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. In August 1990 the applicant let his flat in Karlovac to a certain J.D. for a monthly rent of 100 German marks. J.D. had been paying the rent until May 1991 when the payments stopped. On 25 June 1992 the local authorities issued a decision authorising J.D. to use the applicant’s flat temporarily. On 27 September 1995 the Temporary Takeover and Managing of Certain Property Act (“the Takeover Act”) entered into force. It provided that property belonging to persons who had left Croatia was to be sequestrated i.e. taken into the care of, and controlled by the State. It also authorised local authorities to temporarily accommodate other persons in such property. In August 1998 the Act on Termination of the Takeover Act entered into force. It provided that those persons, whose property had during their absence from Croatia been given for accommodation of others, had to apply for repossession of their property with the competent local authorities. On 30 June 2000 the applicant applied to the local authorities for repossession of his flat. On 16 October 2000 the local authorities set aside its decision of 25 June 1992 and ordered that the property be returned to the applicant. Meanwhile, on 20 May 1996 the applicant brought a civil action against J.D. in the Karlovac Municipal Court ( Općinski sud u Karlovcu ) seeking his eviction and payment of the unpaid rent instalments for the period between May 1991 and June 2000. On 25 October 2001 the court delivered a judgment ordering the respondent to vacate the flat within 15 days but dismissed the applicant’s claim for the unpaid instalments of rent. On 28 October 2003 the Karlovac County Court ( Županijski sud u Karlovcu ) dismissed the applicant’s appeal and upheld the first-instance judgment. The applicant’s subsequent constitutional complaint was dismissed by the Constitutional Court ( Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske ) on 5 May 2004. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that the refusal of the domestic courts to order J.D. to pay him the rent sought had been in breach of his right to property. THE LAW On 14 May 2008 the Government informed the Court that they accepted the proposal for a friendly settlement and that the Government would pay the applicant 3,050 euros in full and final settlement of the case, costs and expenses included. On 26 May 2008 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the parties had reached a settlement whereby the applicant waived any further claims against Croatia in respect of the facts of the present application. 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