CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 18 mai 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s86439055 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .s40269D5B { width:34.93pt; display:inline-block } .s105A34F7 { width:160.96pt; display:inline-block } .sF2E32F9B { width:36.61pt; display:inline-block } .s5F32E900 { width:208.31pt; display:inline-block } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 9731/07 by Pavol DZIAK and Veronika DZIAKOVÁ against Slovakia The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 18   May 2010 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 26 February 2007, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The application was lodged by Mr Pavol Dziak and Mrs Veronika Dziaková, spouses. The applicants, who are Slovak nationals, were born in 1938 and 1941 respectively and live in Košice. The Slovak Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Pirošíková.   The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings which started on 10 May 1995 and lasted for twelve and a half years. On 29 May 2002 the Constitutional Court found a violation of the constitutional equivalent of their right to a hearing within a reasonable time (complaint lodged under Article 130 of the Constitution). On 17 March 2004 it rejected the applicants' fresh constitutional complaint lodged under Article 127 of the Constitution. The Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties on 25 February and 31 March 2010 under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Slovakia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay them 12,000 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses. This sum would be free of any taxes that might 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 undertook 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 LAW 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