FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 11292/05 by Leif Egelund PETERSEN against Denmark

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 22 January 2007 as a Chamber composed of:

Mrs S. Botoucharova , President , Mr P. Lorenzen , Mr K. Jungwiert , Mr V. Butkevych , Mrs M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska , Mr R. Maruste , Mr M. Villiger, judges , and Mrs C. Westerdiek , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 March 2005,

Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together ,

Having regard to the declarations submitted by the respondent Government and the applicant ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Leif Egelund Petersen, is a Danish national who was born in 1943 and lives in Ballerup. He was represented before the Court by Mr Tyge Trier , a lawyer practising in Copenhagen . The Danish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J ørgen Steen Sørensen, of the Ministry of Justice.

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

On 14 January 1988 , the applicant requested that the National Board of Industrial Injuries ( Arbejdskadestyrelsen formerly called Sikringsstyrelsen) grant him compensation . In support thereof he maintained that he had sustained an injury caused by his former work, which in the period from 1978 until 1980 had entailed exposure to the toxic chemical, trichloroethylene. By decision of 11 April 1989 the Board refused to grant the applicant compensation as it did not find that his illness was work ‑ related. The applicant appealed to the Social Appeal Board ( den Sociale Ankestyrelse ) , which held against him by decision of 16 November 1989. On 2 June 1995, his case was re-opened and by decision of 1 December 1995, the Board found anew that the applicant ’ s injury was not work-related. O n appeal , the decision was confirmed by the Social Appeal Board on 18 June 1996 .

In the meantime, on 20 October 1993 the applicant had instituted proceedings before the High Court of Eastern Denmark ( Østre Landsret ) claiming that the Social Appeal Board had to acknowledge that h e had sustained an injur y caused by his work. By j udgment of 16 January 2002 the High Court found in favour of the Social Appeal Board . On appeal, on 16 September 2004 the judgment was confirmed by the Supreme Court ( Højesteret) .

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complain ed under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the length of the proceedings had exceeded the “reasonable time” requirement and under Article 13 of the Convention that he did not have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy.

THE LAW

On 12 December 200 6 the Government submitted the following declaration to the Court :

“I , Mr J ørgen S teen Sørensen , Agent of the Government of Denmark, declare that the Government of Denmark offer to pay ex gratia 70,000 Danish kroner (DKK) to M r Leif Egelund Petersen , with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above ‑ mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights .

The Government of Denmark regret the length of the proceedings before the domestic courts. This statement does not, however, constitute a recognition of the alleged violation of Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention.

This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage , will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to the Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Hu man Right. 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 .

As part of this friendly settlement, it is agreed that the issue of costs and expenses related to the submission and conducting of this application before the European Court of Human Rights is to be resolved finally by the Civil Affairs Agency (Civilstyrelsen ) taking into account that the Civil Affairs Agency already has issued a decision according to which the applicant has been granted legal aid for an amount up to DKK 40,000.

The Government furthermore undertake not to request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention . ”

On 11 December 200 6 the applicant submitted the following declaration to the Court :

“I , Mr Leif Egelund Petersen, note that the Government of Denmark are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of DKK 70,000 with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above ‑ mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights .

I furthermore note that the Government of Denmark regrets the length of the proceedings before the domestic courts. This statement does not, however, constitute a recognition of the alleged violation of Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention.

This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage , will be free of any taxes that may be applicable and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to the Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Hu man Right. 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.

As part of this friendly settlement, I agree to the fact that the issue of costs and expenses related to the submission and conducting of this application before the European Court of Human Rights is to be resolved finally by the Civil Affairs Agency taking into account that the Civil Affairs Agency already has issued a decision according to which I have been granted legal aid for an amount up to DKK 40,000.

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

This declaration is made in the context of a friendly settlement which the Government and I have reached. I further undertake not to request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 § 1 of the Convention . ”

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 o f the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Claudia Westerdiek Snejana Botoucharova Registrar President