CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 12 novembre 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sFEE8C148 { width:13.68pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s9252AC04 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s39A7D870 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sF604F523 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt } .s145CCEB3 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s9019FD2F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s8AD34D0 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .s9671CAED { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s6BBACBD8 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .s160BBE39 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:20.15pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:8.8pt; font-size:10pt } .s451A1BF5 { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s377C1984 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s9D025815 { width:20.21pt; display:inline-block } .sA3B71503 { width:197.8pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 52499/99 by Krzysztof FERENSTEIN against Poland The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 12   November 2002 as a Chamber composed of   Sir   Nicolas Bratza , President ,   Mr   M. Pellonpää ,   Mr   A. Pastor Ridruejo ,   Mrs   V. Strážnická ,   Mr   R. Maruste ,   Mr   S. Pavlovschi ,   Mr   L. Garlicki , judges , and   Mr   M. O’BOYLE , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged with the Court on 8 April 1999, Having regard to the parties’ declarations on concluding a friendly settlement, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Krzysztof Ferenstein, is a Polish national, born in 1951 and living in Gałków, Poland. He is represented before the Court by Mr   L. Zgutka, a lawyer practising in Warsaw, Poland. The respondent Government are represented by Mr K. Drzewicki, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 4 April 1996 the applicant sued the Blos Limited Liability Company in the Warsaw-Praga District Court ( Sąd Rejonowy ), seeking payment. The proceedings are still pending before that court. On 31 May 2001 the Court gave notice of the present application to the Polish Government, pursuant to Rule 54 § 3 (b) of the Rules of Court. On 17 October 2001 the Government asked the Registrar to assist them in friendly settlement negotiations. Following an exchange of correspondence between the parties and the Registrar of the Fourth Section of the Court, the parties submitted their formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case. The Government’s declaration was received on 13 September 2002. The applicant submitted his declaration on 27 September 2002. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that his right to have a hearing within a “reasonable time” was not respected. THE LAW On 13 September 2002 the Court received from the Polish Government a declaration that read, in so far as relevant: “I declare that, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case, the Government of Poland offer to pay 10,000 Polish zlotys to Mr Krzysztof Ferenstein (to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs) plus any tax that may be chargeable on the above amount, and it will be payable within three months ... This payment will constitute the final resolution of the case. ...” On 27 September 2002 the applicant submitted a declaration that read, in its relevant part: “I note that the Government of Poland are prepared to pay me the sum of 10,000 Polish zlotys (to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs) plus any tax that may be chargeable on the above amount, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights. I accept the proposal and waive any further claims agains.t Poland in respect of the facts of this application. I declare that this constitutes a final settlement of the case. ...” The Court takes note of the agreement 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. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list, pursuant to Article   37 § 1 (b) and Article 39 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Michael O’Boyle   Nicolas Bratza   Registrar   President