SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 7888/05 by Ali ALEVCÄ° against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 29 April 2010 as a Chamber composed of:

Françoise Tulkens , President, Ireneu Cabral Barreto , Danutė Jočienė , Dragoljub Popović , Nona Tsotsoria , Işıl Karakaş , Kristina Pardalos , judges, and Sally Dollé , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 3 February 2005,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

PROCEDURE

The application was lodged by Mr Ali Alevci , a Turkish national who was born in 1942 and lives in Ayd ı n . He was represented before the Court by Mr H. Alevci , a lawyer practising in Kuşadas ı . The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicant complained of violations of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol no. 1 to the Convention.

On 23 June 2009 and 13 February 2010 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 him 3,000 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which sum will be converted into Turkish liras 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 t he 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 undertake 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 public policy reasons to justify the continued examination o f 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.

Sally Dollé Françoise Tulkens Registrar President