Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

KREJCIK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Doc ref: 2287/03 • ECHR ID: 001-70325

Document date: September 6, 2005

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

KREJCIK v. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Doc ref: 2287/03 • ECHR ID: 001-70325

Document date: September 6, 2005

Cited paragraphs only

SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 2287/03 by Rudolf KREJČÍK against the Czech Republic

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 6 September 2005 as a Chamber composed of:

Mr J.-P. Costa , President , Mr I. Cabral Barreto , Mr K. Jungwiert , Mr V. Butkevych , Mr M. Ugrekhelidze , Mrs A. Mularoni , Mrs E. Fura-Sandström , judges , and Mrs S. Dollé , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 January 2003 ,

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

Having r egard to the formal declaration accepting a friendly settlement of the case.

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Rudolf Krejčík , is a Czech national who was born in 1945 and lives in Ř evnice . He is represented before the Court by Mr V. Vlk , a lawyer practising in Pra gue .

The facts of the case, as submitted by the partie s, may be summarised as follows:

On 17 October 1995 the Prague-West District Court ( okresní soud ) , upon the applicant ’ s request of 9 October 1995, ordered Mr M. to pay CZK 13,000 (EUR 419) with default interest to the applicant.

Between 1996 and February 2005 the court conducted execution proceedings, during which the applicant was paid the sum of CZK 23,188 (EUR 771).

COMPLA IN TS

The applicant originally complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the delays in the execution proceedings and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that, due to the lengthy execution proceedings, he was deprived of his property.

THE LAW

On 28 June 2005 the Court received the following declaration signed by the legal representatives of the parties:

[Translation of the Government]

“ The Government of the Czech Republic , represented before the European Court of Human Rights by their Agent Mr. Vít Alexander Schorm (“the Government”),

and

Mr. Rudolf Krejčík (“the Applicant”), represented by his counsel Mr. Václav Vlk ,

declare that:

1. they have reached a friendly settlement of case No. 2287/03 – Rudolf Krejčík v. the Czech Republic (“the Application”);

2. the Government will pay to the Applicant a total amount of 44 , 000 Czech crowns (in words “forty-four thousand Czech crowns”) [about 1,463 euros] , within three months from the date of the notification of the judg ment delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) pursuant to Article 39 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”), to a bank account that the Applicant will specify to the Ministry of Justice without undue delay upon request ;

3. the above-mentioned sum is to cover any damage that might have been caused to the Applicant by the Czech Republic through its author ities, including legal expenses;

4. if the above-mentioned amount is not paid within the designated time of three months from the date of the notification of the Court ’ s judgment, then from the expiry date, a simple interest on the amount shall be paid at an annual rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Ba nk plus three percentage points;

5. the Applicant waives any further claims against the Czech Republic based on the facts of the proceedings before the Court on the basis of the Application, and regards this friendly settlement as the fina l settlement of the Application; ...”

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). Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it sh ould be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

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

S. Dollé J.-P. Costa Registrar President

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 400211 • Paragraphs parsed: 44892118 • Citations processed 3448707