CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 10 mars 2015

.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 } .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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s8F016750 { width:131.63pt; display:inline-block } .sA149F1D5 { width:182.32pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s8CACEEF2 { width:117.46%; border-collapse:collapse } .sCB8B756B { height:51.05pt } .s41CEE2EF { border-bottom:0.75pt solid #949494; vertical-align:top } .s5CA14C57 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sCC7C2404 { height:124.2pt } .sA1D7089D { height:82.8pt } .s9538EC41 { height:0pt } .sF8535C3E { width:26.65pt } .s97E1461 { width:184.25pt } .sE482B8AC { width:141.8pt } .sE40C1F58 { width:92.1pt }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 34710/13 Maria VIEIRA SOARES and others against Portugal The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 10   March 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President,   Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque,   Ksenija Turković, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 May 2013, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants are all Portuguese nationals. They were represented before the Court by Ms. M. A. Noronha da Costa Fernandes, a lawyer practising in Santa Maria da Feira. A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The Portuguese Government (“the Government”) was represented by their Agent, Mrs M. F. da Graça Carvalho, Deputy Attorney-General. The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings before the Santa Maria da Feira Court to which they were a party. On 9 December 2014 and 19 January 2015 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicants agreed to waive any further claims against Portugal in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay them the sums set in the appendix to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. 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 the 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. 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 in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   Done in English and notified in writing on 2 April 2015. André Wampach   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska Deputy Registrar   President   Appendix       Friendly settlement sums   Name of the applicants Date of birth Place of residence Non-pecuniary damage in euros (EUR) Costs and expenses in euros (EUR) 1. Maria Vieira Soares 17/08/1946 Santa Maria da Feira EUR 11.700                   EUR 1.000 jointly 2.       3. Maria Justina Henriques Bernardes 27/09/1941 Santa Maria da Feira   Ernesto Ferreira de Barros 26/05/1940 Santa Maria da Feira       EUR 11.700 jointly 4.     5. Alzira Brandão 26/06/1920 Santa Maria da Feira   António Correia Marques 20/03/1918 Santa Maria da Feira     EUR 10.400 jointly 6. Avelino António de Sousa Vieira 08/09/1942 Santa Maria da Feira   EUR 10.400