CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 23 septembre 2014

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sBAD0D18F { width:1.87pt; display:inline-block } .sC9D6F765 { width:209.11pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s25B97BCD { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .sF5C9E8B1 { height:46.3pt } .sD1CDDC62 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s2490CDBC { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s8DB21C27 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s67CDEFD { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.4pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.4pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s26ADB50A { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .s2F4AF114 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6CF83D49 { margin-left:11.67pt; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sB71F2881 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA0B2759 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sBCA334AF { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7CB6920E { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62945D10 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 64107/13 Biljana TOŠIĆ against Serbia and 4 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23   September 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Ján Šikuta, President,   Dragoljub Popović,   Iulia Antoanella Motoc, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section egistrar , Having regard to the above applications lodged on 30 September 2013, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the cases, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants’ personal and other relevant details are set out in the appended table. They were represented by Mr S. Protić, a lawyer practicing in Belgrade. The Serbian Government ("the Government") were represented by their Agent, Ms V. Rodić. Relying on various Articles of the Convention, the applicants complained about the respondent State’s failure to enforce final court decisions rendered in their favour against different socially/State-owned companies. The essential information as to the domestic proceedings in respect of each application is indicated in the appended table. Between 21 January 2014 and 4 June 2014 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Serbia in respect of the facts giving rise to these applications against an undertaking by the Government to pay each of them 2,000 EUR (two thousand euros) to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into local currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be free of any taxes that may be applicable. These sums would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. In the event of failure to pay these sums within the said three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on them, 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 parties, furthermore, agreed that within the said three-month period the Government would pay, from their own funds, the sums awarded in the domestic decisions under consideration in the present cases (see table appended), less any amounts which may have already been paid on the basis of the said decisions, plus the costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings. These payments will constitute the final resolution of the cases pending before the European Court of Human Rights. THE LAW The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their similar factual and legal background. 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 applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   Marialena Tsirli   Ján Šikuta Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX No. Application no. and date of introduction Applicant name date of birth place of residence nationality Final domestic decision details Enforcement order details   64107/13 30/09/2013 Biljana TOŠIĆ 06/09/1956 Serbian   Fifth Belgrade Municipal Court   12 September 2007 Fourth Belgrade Municipal Court   10 July 2008   64229/13 30/09/2013 Dušan MLADENOVIĆ 01/06/1952 Serbian   Fifth Belgrade Municipal Court   28 November 2007 First Belgrade Court of First Instance   5 July 2011       64230/13 30/09/2013 Jevto MIĆIĆ 02/02/1950 Serbian   Fifth Belgrade Municipal Court   8 February 2008 Fourth Belgrade Municipal Court   16 May 2008   64240/13 30/09/2013 Milorad NOVKOVIĆ 07/02/1953 Serbian   Fifth Belgrade Municipal Court   12 September 2007 Fourth Belgrade Municipal Court   10 July 2008   64243/13 30/09/2013 Mihailo FILIPOVIĆ 13/08/1966 Serbian   Fifth Belgrade Municipal Court   28 November 2007     First Belgrade Court of First Instance   6 July 2011