Přehled
Rozhodnutí
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 26988/04
by Ruslan Viktorovych BAKHUR
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 6 June 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
Mr P. Lorenzen, President,
Mr K. Jungwiert,
Mr V. Butkevych,
Mrs M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska,
Mr R. Maruste,
Mr J. Borrego Borrego,
Mrs R. Jaeger, judges,
and Mrs C. Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 July 2004,
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 regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ruslan Viktorovych Bakhur, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1973 and resides in the city of Zhytomyr, Ukraine. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agents, Mrs V. Lutkovska and Mr Y. Zaytsev, and Mrs I. Shevchuk, Head of the Office of the Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 29 November 2001 the Bogunskyy District Court of Zhytomyr awarded the applicant UAH 2,248 against a certain Mrs V. This judgment remained unenforced.
On 22 May 2002, upon the applicant’s complaint, the same court ordered the State Bailiffs’ Service to enforce the judgment.
As Mrs V. died and the judgment remained unenforced, in October 2002 the applicant instituted new proceedings against the State Bailiffs’ Service claiming compensation for moral damage caused by the non-enforcement.
On 22 December 2003 the court awarded the applicant UAH 1,500[1] in compensation for moral damage against the State Bailiffs’ Service (рішення Богунського районного суду).
On 17 February 2004 the Bogunskyy District Bailiffs’ Service (Відділ Державної виконавчої служби Богунського районного управління юстиції) initiated enforcement proceedings. However, this judgment also remains unenforced. On 26 March 2004 the Bailiffs’ Service returned the writ of enforcement on the ground that no funds were foreseen for such kinds of payment.
On 3 April 2004 the applicant appealed against this decision to the Bogunskyy District Court. On 5 July 2004 the Bogunskyy District Court annulled the decision and ordered the re-opening of the enforcement proceedings.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgment of 22 December 2003 in his favour. He further complained in substance under Article 1 of Protocol No.1 about a violation of his property rights.
THE LAW
On 14 February 2006 the Court received the following declaration, signed by the applicant:
“I, Mr Ruslan Viktorovych BAKHUR, note that the Government of Ukraine are prepared to pay the judgment debt still owed to me, as well as to pay me ex gratia the sum of EUR 1,000 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
The sum of EUR 1,000 will be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. 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. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.
This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached.”
On 13 February 2006 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:
“I, Iryna SHEVCHUK, Head of the Office of the Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights, declare that the Government of Ukraine offer to pay the judgment debt still owed to Mr Ruslan Viktorovych Bakhur, as well as to pay him ex gratia the sum of EUR 1,000 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
The sum of EUR 1,000 will be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. 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. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, 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 payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”
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 public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). 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.
Claudia Westerdiek Peer Lorenzen
Registrar President
[1] At the material time EUR 233.12