CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 18 juin 2013

.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 } .s6477A72F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA1CDB767 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s281358E1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sFD4D42B6 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s471F7CE { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; 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 } .s260B30F2 { width:16.02pt; display:inline-block } .sF03B00FD { width:194.96pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 21300/09 Lasha KASRADZE against Georgia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 18   June   2013 as a Committee composed of:   Ján Šikuta, President,   Luis López Guerra,   Nona Tsotsoria, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 February 2009, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr Lasha Kasradze, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1989 and lives in Tbilisi. He was represented before the Court by Mr Gela Nikolaishvili, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi. 2.     The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Levan Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice. 3.     On 29 November 2012 the Court gave notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning his placement in a metal cage during the court proceedings and a complaint under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (d) of the Convention concerning the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings conducted against him. 4.     On 25 April 2013 the Court received a friendly settlement declaration signed by the Government, which reads as follows: “Acknowledging the existence of certain deficiencies in the course of the examination of the case by domestic courts; and the applicant’s placement in a metal cage on several occasions during the proceedings before the first instance court; Bearing in mind the applicant’s right envisaged under Article 310 (e) of the Criminal Procedure Code of Georgia, entitling him to address the domestic court with a request to reopen the criminal case on the basis of a decision/judgment rendered by the European Court; The Government undertake to pay 4,000 (four thousand) Euros to cover any pecuniary or non-pecuniary damages and costs and expenses. This sum will be converted into Georgian laris at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court to strike the case out of its list of cases. 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 fulfilment of the above-mentioned conditions shall constitute a final resolution of this application.” 5.     The applicant accepted the friendly settlement proposal and submitted a signed declaration form to that effect on 30 May 2013. THE LAW 6.     The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine . For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Marialena Tsirli   Ján Šikuta   Deputy Registrar   President