Přehled
Rozhodnutí
THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 1549/02
by Mirko and Aranka GRČA
against Slovenia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 9 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
Mr J. Hedigan, President,
Mr B.M. Zupančič,
Mr V. Zagrebelsky,
Mrs A. Gyulumyan,
Mr E. Myjer,
Mrs I. Ziemele,
Mrs I. Berro-Lefevre, judges,
and Mr V. Berger, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 26 March 2002,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Mirko Grča and Mrs Aranka Grča, are Slovenian nationals who were born in 1954 and 1952 respectively and live in Lendava. They are represented before the Court by Mr D. Rituper, a lawyer practising in Lendava.
The respondent Government (“the Government”) are represented by Mr L. Bembič, State Attorney-General.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 27 August 1993 the applicants instituted civil proceedings with the Murska Sobota Basic Court, Lendava Unit (Temeljno sodišče v Murski Soboti, Enota Lendava) against the company named Terme Lendava (“TL”) seeking 560,000 Slovenian tolars for overpaid rent. They also sought the exemption from paying court fees.
Until 28 June 1994, the day the Convention entered into force with respect to Slovenia, one hearing was held. This hearing was adjourned sine die because the applicants and their lawyer failed to appear.
On 1 January 1995 the Lendava Local Court (Okrajno sodišče v Lendavi) gained jurisdiction in the present case due to the reform of the Slovenian judicial system.
On 18 May 2001 the applicants filed preliminary written submissions and requested that a date be set for a hearing.
On 25 September 2001 the court held a hearing.
On 5 and 6 November 2001 the applicants filed preliminary written submissions.
On 6 November 2001 the court held a hearing and decided to issue a written judgment.
The judgment, upholding the applicants’ claim in part, was served on the applicants on 27 December 2001.
On 11 January 2002 the applicants appealed to the Maribor Higher Court (Višje sodišče v Mariboru). TL cross-appealed.
On 24 March 2004 the court dismissed the appeals. The decisions were served on the parties on 26 April 2004.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that their right to a fair trial was violated by an excessive length of proceedings. In substance, they also complained about the lack of an effective domestic remedy in respect of the excessive length of the proceedings (Article 13).
THE LAW
On 24 April 2006 the Government made a proposal for a friendly settlement. On 28 August 2006 the Court received the following declaration from the Government made in accordance with their proposal:
“I, Lucijan BEMBIČ, Agent of the Republic of Slovenia, declare that the Government of Slovenia offer to pay each 2,300 euros to Mr Mirko Grča and Mrs Aranka Grča with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and it 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...”
On 6 October 2006 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicants:
“We, Mirko Grča and Aranka Grča, note that the Government of Slovenia are prepared to pay us each the sum of 2,300 euros with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and it will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights...
We accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Slovenia in respect of the facts giving raise to this application. We declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case...”
The Court takes note of the friendly settlement reached between the parties (Article 39 of the Convention). It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).
Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Vincent Berger John Hedigan
Registrar President