CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 28 juin 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sF3B96856 { width:11.87pt; display:inline-block } .s330D47D5 { width:214.44pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 53549/13 Maria SCHMUTZOVÁ and Alojz VITTEK against Slovakia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 28   June   2016 as a Committee composed of:   Helen Keller, President,   Johannes Silvis,   Alena Poláčková, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 August 2013, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicants, Ms Mária Schmutzová and Mr Alojz Vittek, both Slovak nationals, were born in 1929 and 1939 respectively. The first applicant lived in Bratislava and the second applicant lives in Boleráz. They were represented before the Court by Mr S. Jakubčík, a lawyer practising in   Bratislava. The Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Pirošíková. The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of their civil proceedings. By letter of 2 February 2016, the applicants’ lawyer informed the Registry that the first applicant, Ms Mária Schmutzová, had passed away on   26   October 2015. By letter of 27 April 2016 the applicants’ lawyer informed the Court that the first applicant’s heir did not wish to pursue the application on behalf of her deceased relative. The Court received friendly settlement declarations dated on   18   and   25   January 2016 and signed by the parties under which the second applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Slovakia in   respect of   the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 2,350   euros to cover any pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses. This sum will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and it 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 In the light of the foregoing, the Court notes that the first applicant’s   heir does not wish to pursue the application within the meaning of   Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. The Court also takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the Government and the second applicant. 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   Articles 37 § 1 (a) and 39 of the Convention respectively.   Done in English and notified in writing on 21 July 2016.   Fatoş Aracı   Helen Keller Deputy Registrar   President