SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 8091/05 by H ü seyin ŞEN against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7 April 2009 as a Chamber composed of:

Françoise Tulkens , President, Ireneu Cabral Barreto , Vladimiro Zagrebelsky , Danutė Jočienė , András Sajó , Nona Tsotsoria , Işıl Karakaş , 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:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr H ü seyin Şen, is a Turkish national who was born in 1949 and lives in Balıkesir . He was repres ented before the Court by Mr K. Çelikboya, a lawyer practising also in Bal ı kesir. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant worked as Head of the Trade Division in SEKA ( the Turkish Cellulose and Paper Factory Enterprise) until 28 May 1997. By a decision of SEKA ’ s Executive Board, he was transferred to the Mediterranean Productivity Division.

On 29 September 1997 the applicant initiated administrative proceedings against SEKA, requesting the annulment and suspension of the Executive Board ’ s decision. O n 17 May 2004 the Bursa 2 nd Administrative Court annulled SEKA ’ s decision. The judgm ent became final on 6 September 2004.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the length of the administrative proceedings in his case exceeded the reasonable time requirement .

THE LAW

T he Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“ I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay ex gratia EUR 1,000 (one thousand euros) to Mr Hüseyin Ş en with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into [ New ] Turkish liras 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 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. ”

T he Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:

“ I note that the Government of Turkey are prepared to pay ex gratia the sum of EUR 1,000 (one thousand euros) to Mr Hüseyin Ş en with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into [ New ] Turkish liras 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 European Convention on Human Rights. From the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amount at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. I declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case. ”

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). 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