Slavco MITREV and others v Serbia - 13757/06 [2009] ECHR 546 (10 March 2009)

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [ DONATE ] European Court of Human Rights You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Slavco MITREV and others v Serbia - 13757/06 [2009] ECHR 546 (10 March 2009) URL: https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/546.html Cite as: [2009] ECHR 546 [ New search ] [ Contents list ] [ Printable RTF version ] [ Help ] SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 13757/06 by Sla včo MITREV and others against Serbia The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 10 March 2009 as a Chamber composed of: Françoise Tulkens, President, Ireneu Cabral Barreto, Vladimiro Zagrebelsky, Danutė Jočienė, Dragoljub Popović, András Sajó, Nona Tsotsoria, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos , Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 March 2006, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants, Mr Sla včo Mitrev (the “first applicant”), Ms Jelena Mitrev (the “second applicant”) and Mr Miodrag Mitrev (the “third applicant”) are Serbian nationals who were born in 1928, 1927 and 1951, respectively, and live in Bujanovac. The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr S. Cari ć . The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 19 November 1984 the applicants filed a civil trespass claim against a third party. Following two remittals, on 19 January 2006 Fifth Municipal Court ( Opštinski sud ) in Belgrade rejected the applicants' claim. On 17 February 2006 the applicants appealed and the proceedings are currently pending before the District Court ( OkruZni sud ) in Belgrade. COMPLAINT Under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the applicants complained about the excessive length of their civil suit. THE LAW On 9 October 2008 the Court received the following declaration from the Government: “ I declare that the Government of Serbia offer to pay ex gratia 4,000 euros to Sla včo, Jelena and Miodrag Mitrev jointly with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. This sum, which is to cover any non-pecuniary damage, suffered as a result of domestic procedural delay, as well as the costs and expenses, will be converted into the national currency 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 pending before the European Court of Human Rights. The applicants' domestic claims shall be considered by the Serbian courts separately and are not affected by this declaration.” The Court received the following declaration signed by the applicants: “ We note that the Government of Serbia are prepared to pay us ex gratia the sum of 4,000 euros jointly with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights ... We accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Serbia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. We declare that this constitutes the final resolution of ... [the applicants'] ... case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. The ... [the applicants'] ... domestic claims shall be considered by the Serbian courts separately and are not affected by this declaration.” 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). In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously by a majority Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. Francoise Elens-Passos Françoise Tulkens Deputy Registrar President BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/546.html