CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 13 octobre 2009

.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 } .s72F8249F { font-family:Arial; display:none } .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 } .sF8DCB537 { width:16.53pt; display:inline-block } .s25347E17 { width:182.43pt; display:inline-block } .s92A1A400 { width:0.97pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 21387/06 by Martin KUBÍNY against Slovakia The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 13   October 2009 as a Chamber composed of:   Nicolas Bratza, President,   Giovanni Bonello,   David Thór Björgvinsson,   Ján Šikuta,   Päivi Hirvelä,   Ledi Bianku,   Nebojša Vučinić, judges, and Lawrence Early, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 May 2006, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Martin Kubíny, is a Slovak national who was born in 1979 and lives in Bratislava. He was represented before the Court by Mrs   C.   Kubínyová, his mother. The Slovak Government (“the   Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Pirošíková. The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. 1. Civil proceedings On 30 August 2000 the applicant lodged a civil action with the   Bratislava   I District Court related to his maintenance. On 19 February 2001 the case-file was transferred to the Bratislava IV District Court. The Bratislava Regional Court determined three procedural issues in the course of the proceedings. On 4 October 2007 the District Court delivered a judgment which was upheld by the Bratislava Regional Court on 5 June 2008. The applicant lodged an appeal on points of law and requested (i) that a   lawyer should be appointed to represent him and (ii) to be exempted from his obligation to pay the court fees. On 5 November 2008 the District Court did not grant his request and the decision was upheld by the Regional Court on 27 January 2009. In March 2009 the applicant’s appeal on points of law was transmitted to the Supreme Court for decision. 2. Constitutional proceedings On 15 March 2006 the Constitutional Court found that the Bratislava IV District Court had violated the applicant’s right to a hearing without unjustified delay, awarded the equivalent of 798 euros to the applicant as just satisfaction and ordered the District Court to avoid any further delay in the proceedings.   COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings. THE LAW On 14 July 2009 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “I, Marica Pirošíková, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of the Slovak Republic offer to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 1,750 (one thousand seven hundred and fifty euros) to Mr Martin Kubíny 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. 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.”   On 15 July 2009 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s representative: “I, Cecília Kubínyová, the legal representative of the applicant, note that the Government of the Slovak Republic are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 1,750 (one thousand seven hundred and fifty euros) to Mr Martin Kubíny, the applicant, 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. 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. Having consulted the applicant, I would inform you that he accepts the proposal and waives any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. He declares that this constitutes a 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 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 strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Lawrence Early   Nicolas Bratza   Registrar President