CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 16 décembre 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sBAD0D18F { width:1.87pt; display:inline-block } .sC9D6F765 { width:209.11pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 52957/12 Šahida CRNOVRŠANIN against Serbia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 16   December 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Ján Šikuta, President,   Dragoljub Popović,   Iulia Antoanella Motoc, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 August 2012, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Ms Šahida Crnovršanin, is a Serbian national, who was born in 1948 and lives in Novi Pazar. She was represented before the Court by Mr I. Kalić, a lawyer practising in Novi Pazar. The Serbian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs V. Rodić. The applicant’s late husband, M.C., was an employee of Raška Holding u   restruktuiranju (the debtor) , a socially-owned company. On 31 October 2003 and 21 February 2006 he obtained final court decisions ordering the debtor to pay him certain sums. On 22 December 2003 and 3 July 2006 the Municipal Court in Novi Pazar issued the enforcement orders related to these decisions. On 29 July 2008 M.C. passed away. The applicant, his widow, was declared as his heir. Relying on Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention, as well as Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention the applicant complained about the failure by the national authorities to enforce those decisions. On 4 October 2013 and 3 November 2014 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Serbia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 2,000 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which will be converted into the local currency at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. 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 Government further declared that within the same three-month period it will pay to the applicant, from their own funds, the sums awarded in the domestic decisions under consideration in this case, less any amounts which may have already been paid on the basis of the said decisions, plus the costs of the domestic enforcement proceedings. These payments 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. 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 in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.   Marialena Tsirli   Ján Šikuta Deputy Registrar   President