CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 18 septembre 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBAA06C68 { width:13.67pt; display:inline-block } .sC7BF4101 { width:166.26pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 31331/06 Pavel Ivanovich BURDIYAN against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 18   September 2012 as a Committee composed of:   Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,   Ann Power-Forde,   Angelika Nußberger, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 July 2006, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Pavel Ivanovich Burdiyan, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1925 and lives in Dnepropetrovsk. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that he had been denied the right to appeal in cassation against the decisions of the courts in his civil case. He also complained that he had not been afforded an effective remedy in respect of his complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. Relying on Article 3 of the Convention, the applicant complained of disdainful and degrading treatment by the State on account of the outcome of the proceedings. On 27 February and 22 May 2012 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him ex gratia 1,500 euros. This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses. It will be converted into Ukrainian hryvnias at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. The sum 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 Convention. 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.   Stephen Phillips   Boštjan M. Zupančič   Deputy Registrar   President