CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 janvier 2015

.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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s28BDCFEA { width:6.53pt; display:inline-block } .s3B18E3A1 { width:198.76pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 14010/08 Ahmetcan BAYDENİZ against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 13   January 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Nebojša Vučinić, President,   Paul Lemmens,   Egidijus Kūris, judges, and Abel Campos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 February 2008, Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Ahmetcan Baydeniz, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1989 and lives in Tekirdağ He was represented before the Court by Mr İ. Akmeşe, a lawyer practising in Istanbul. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicant complained under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention that the length of his detention in police custody as well as the length of his pre-trial detention had been excessive. The applicant further contended under Articles 5 § 4 and 13 of the Convention that in dismissing his objection against the decision to detain him, the court had not held a hearing. He further complained under the same heads that the decision was given without an adversarial procedure, i.e. without obtaining his submissions in the reply to the public prosecutor’s observations and without him accessing the investigation file. The applicant finally complained under Article 5 § 5 that he had not had a remedy whereby he could claim compensation for the alleged violations of Article   5   § 3 and 4 of the Convention. On 17 April 2013 and 2 September 2014 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay the applicant EUR 3,000 (three thousand euros) to cover any and all non-pecuniary damage and EUR 500 (five hundred euros) to cover any and all costs and expenses. These sums will be converted into the 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. They 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 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. 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. Done in English and notified in writing on 5 February 2015.   Abel Campos   Nebojša Vučinić Deputy Registrar   President