CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 9 avril 2013

.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 } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; 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 } .s6ADF1EA6 { width:167.26pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 18960/12 Vladimir Yakovlevich BALKOVOY against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 9 April 2013 as a Committee composed of:   Angelika Nußberger, President,   André Potocki,   Aleš Pejchal, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 March 2012, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Vladimir Yakovlevich Balkovoy, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1953 and lives in Dnepropetrovsk He was represented before the Court by Mr A. S. Kuznetsov, a lawyer practising in Zaporizzya. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy, of the Ministry of Justice. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of criminal proceedings and lack of effective remedies in that respect. The applicant also referred to Articles 5 §§ 1 (c), 3, 6 §§ 2, 3 (a, b, d) and 13 of the Convention. On 4 and 10 December 2012 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties 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 500 (five hundred) euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Ukrainian hryvnia at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be free of any taxes that might be applicable. It would 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 undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the 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 public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   Stephen Phillips   Angelika Nußberger   Deputy Registrar   President