CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 28 août 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sBAA06C68 { width:13.67pt; display:inline-block } .s5B12D80C { width:187.62pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 18415/08 Ivan Ivanovich KUSHNEROV against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 28   August 2012 as a Committee composed of:   Mark Villiger, President,   Ganna Yudkivska,   André Potocki, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 March 2008, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Ivan Ivanovich Kushnerov, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1953 and lives in Gorlivka. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice. The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings brought by him against his employer for acknowledgment of his disease as being work-related as well as the lack of an effective remedy in that regard; these complaints were communicated to the Government. He also raised a complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention. The Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties and dated 16 March and 11 April 2012 under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 3,400 (three thousand four hundred) euros to cover any and all non ‑ pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be 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 Convention. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three ‑ month period, the Government undertook 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 LAW 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 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 Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Stephen Phillips   Mark Villiger   Deputy Registrar   President