CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 septembre 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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s5830ECD9 { width:0.2pt; display:inline-block } .s3A429166 { width:181.77pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 15556/11 Ekaterine NINIDZE against Georgia The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 13   September 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Krzysztof Wojtyczek, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 February 2011, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Ms Ekaterine Ninidze, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1951 and lives in Batumi. She was represented before the Court by Mr I. Shavadze, a lawyer practising in Batumi. 2.     The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Meskhoradze, of the Ministry of Justice. 3.     The applicant complained that the expropriation of her real estate by the municipal authorities of Batumi had been conducted in breach of Article   1 of Protocol No. 1 given that the relevant proceedings had been unlawful and that she had never obtained an adequate compensation. The disputed estate consisted of a house which measured 212 square meters and was located on a plot of land of some 1,902 square meters in a district of Batumi, the so-called Adlia Settlement. Two other additional premises of non-residential nature with the overall area of some 78 square meters were situated on the same land, as well as a garden of 356 units of various fruit and decorative trees and bushes. 4.     On 1 October 2015 notice of the application was given to the Government. 5. On 24 December 2015 the applicant informed the Court that she wished to withdraw the application since she had reached a settlement with the Batumi City Hall on 27 November 2015. According to the terms of that settlement, she were to receive from the municipal authority, as a compensation for the expropriated property, seven small individual apartments, measuring between 29 and 40 square meters, located in a central street of Batumi (3 Zubalashvili Lane) as well as a land plot of some 2,199 square meters situated at the outskirts of Batumi (in the so-called Kakhaberi settlement). In addition, the municipal authority undertook an obligation to pay her the following amounts: 23,693 Georgian Laris and 4,000 United States dollars, to be converted into the national currency. 6.   On 28 January 2016   the Court received a letter from the Government confirming the validity of the above-mentioned agreement between the applicant and the Batumi City Hall. The Government submitted that there was no need for a continued examination of the case given the complete resolution of the matter of the dispute at the domestic level. THE LAW 7.     In the light of the above, the Court considers 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 . Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Done in English and notified in writing on 6 October 2016.   Andrea Tamietti   Krzysztof Wojtyczek Deputy Registrar   President