THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 20628/02 by Matilda KOLER against Slovenia

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23 November 2006 as a Chamber composed of:

Mr J. Hedigan , President, Mr B.M. Zupančič , Mr V. Zagrebelsky , Mrs A. Gyulumyan , Mr E. Myjer , Mrs I. Ziemele , Mrs I. Berro-Lefevre , judges, and Mr V. Berger , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 May 2002 ,

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 formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mrs Matilda Koler, is a Slovenian national who was born in 1927 and lives in Maribor .

The Slovenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Bembič , State Attorney-General .

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

On 2 March 1989 the applicant ’ s aunt died.

On 5 December 1989 the Maribor Basic Court , Maribor Unit ( Temeljno sodišče v Mariburu , Enota v Mariboru ) decided in inheritance proceedings that the applicant and twenty other relatives were heirs of the deceased ’ s property. Several heirs, including K.L. appealed.

On 13 November 1990 the Maribor Higher Court ( Višje sodišče v Mariburu ) allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the first-instance court for re-examination.

On 1 January 1995 the Maribor Local Court ( Okrajno sodišče v Mariburu ) gained jurisdiction in the present case due to the reform of the Slovenian judicial system.

On 17 October 1995 the court held a hearing in the re-examination proceedings.

At an undetermined time and for an unknown reason the case was transferred to a new judge.

On 25 September 1996 a hearing was held.

On 30 September 1996 the court issued a new decision. K.L. appealed.

At an undetermined time the Maribor Higher Court allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the first-instance court for re-examination.

On 21 February 1997 the Maribor Local Court held a hearing.

On 25 February 1997 the court issued a new decision. K.L. appealed.

At an undetermined time the Maribor Higher Court allowed the appeal and remitted the case to the first-instance court for re-examination.

On 23 July 1997 the Maribor Local Court decided that the potential heirs should institute contentious proceedings against the heirs to establish whether or not the deceased made a will.

On 15 September 1997 the litigious proceedings were instituted with the Maribor Local Court .

On 13 May 1999 the court held a hearing.

On 13 March 2000 the court issued a judgment finding that the deceased made no will.

K.L. appealed.

On 13 March 2001 the Maribor Higher Court dismissed the appeal.

On 31 August 2001 a hearing was held before the first-instance court in the inheritance proceedings.

On 22 October 2001 the Maribor Local Court issued a new decision in the inheritance proceedings.

K.L. and two other parties appealed to the Maribor Higher Court , which dismissed their appeal.

The decision of 22 October 2001 thus became final on 27 November 2002.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complain ed under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that her right to a fair trial was violated by an excessive length of proceedings. In substance, s he also complained about the lack of an effective domestic remedy in respect of the excessive length of the proceedings (Article 13).

THE LAW

On 29 September the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I, Lucijan B embič , Agent of the Republic of Slovenia , declare that the Government of Slovenia offer to pay 2,500 euros to Mrs Matilda Koler with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and it will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights...”

On 20 October 2006 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant:

“I, Matilda Koler, note that the Government of Slovenia are prepared to pay me ex gratia the sum of 2,500 euros with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

This sum is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, and 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...

I accept the proposal and waive any further claims against Slovenia in respect of the facts giving raise 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 (Article 39 of the Convention). It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).

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.

Vincent Berger John H edigan Registrar President