CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 17 septembre 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s260B30F2 { width:16.02pt; display:inline-block } .sBF1D92B9 { width:173.61pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 23846/08 Nikoloz BADAGADZE against Georgia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 17   September 2013 as a Committee composed of:   Luis López Guerra, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Valeriu Griţco, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 May 2008, Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 23 April 2013 and the applicant’s acceptance of its terms, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr Nikoloz Badagadze, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1975 and lives in Tbilisi. He was represented before the Court by Mr Givi Badagadze and Ms Rusudan Gabodze, lawyers practising in Tbilisi. 2.     The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Levan Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice. 3.     On 18 December 2012 the Court gave notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) and (d) of the Convention concerning the alleged lack of treatment for his drug-addiction in prison, poor conditions of detention and the alleged unfairness of the criminal proceedings conducted against him. 4.     On 23 April 2013 the Court received a friendly settlement declaration signed by the Government Agent, which after being subsequently rectified on 10 June 2013, reads as follows: “Acknowledging the failure of prison authorities to provide the applicant with a compulsory drug treatment program; Considering the existence of certain deficiencies in the course of examination of the case by domestic courts; 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 5,000 (five thousand) 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 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 ...” 5.     In a letter of 10 June 2013 the applicant informed the Court that he had agreed to the terms of the Government’s declaration and invited the Court to strike out the application out of the list of cases. 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   Luis López Guerra   Deputy Registrar   President