THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 42128/98 by Sabahattin SARIKAYA against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 15 May 2003 as a Chamber composed of

Mr G. Ress , President , Mr I. Cabral Barreto , Mr L. Caflisch , Mr R. Türmen , Mr B. Zupančič , Mrs H.S. Greve , Mr K. Traja , judges , and Mr V. Berger , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 14 May 1998,

Having regard to Article 5 § 2 of Protocol No. 11 to the Convention, by which the competence to examine the application was transferred to the Court,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Sabahattin Sarıkaya , is a Turkish national who was born in 1952 and lives in Ankara.

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

On 26 March 1991 the General Directorate of National Roads and Highways ( Devlet Karayolları Genel Müdürlüğü ) expropriated plots of land belonging to the applicant and to five other shareholders in Konak , Izmir . A committee of experts assessed the value of the plots of land belonging to the applicant and compensation was paid to him when the expropriation took place.

Following the applicant’s request for increased compensation, the Izmir First Instance Court awarded him additional compensation at the statutory rate of 30% per annum, namely the rate applicable at the date of the court’s decision. The court decided that the running of the statutory rate of interest will start from 21 January 1991. On 14 December 1993, on the General Directorate’s appeal, the Court of Cassation amended the date for the running of the statutory rate of interest as 26 March 1991 and upheld the decision of the first instance court. On 19 January 1998 the administration paid the applicant the additional compensation awarded to him together with interest. The interest on the additional compensation was calculated at the statutory rate applicable between the date of the decision of the Court of Cassation in favour of the applicant and 31 December 1997, namely 30%. As regards the period after 1 January 1998 the interest was calculated at the then applicable rate, namely 50%.

Between 1993 and 1999 the rate of inflation averaged 81.7% per annum.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 that the rate of interest applied to the calculation of the additional compensation granted to him for the expropriation of his land was too low. He also complains about the delay in obtaining the additional compensation.

THE LAW

On 13 December 2001 the Court received the following declaration signed by the applicant’s representative:

“In my capacity as the representative of the applicant, Mr Sabahattin Sarıkaya , I have taken cognizance of the declaration of the Government of Turkey that they are prepared to make an ex gratia all-inclusive payment of 9,000 (nine thousand) United States dollars (USD) with a view to concluding a friendly settlement of the case that originated in application no. 42128/98. This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as legal costs and expenses connected with the case, will be paid in accordance with the terms stipulated in the said declaration within three months after the notification of the Court’s [decision] ...

Having duly consulted the applicant, I accept that offer and he, in consequence, waives all other claims against Turkey in respect of the matters that were at the origin of the application...

This declaration is made within the scope of the friendly settlement which the Government and I, in agreement with the applicant, have reached...”

On 15 April 2003 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I declare that the Government of Turkey offer to pay ex gratia to the applicant, Mr Sabahattin Sarıkaya , an all-inclusive amount of 9,000 (nine thousand) United States dollars (USD) with a view to securing a friendly settlement of his application registered under no. 42128/98. This sum, which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as legal costs and expenses connected with the case, shall be free of any tax that may be applicable and be paid in United States dollars (USD) to a bank account named by the applicant and / or his duly authorised representative and shall be payable within three months from the date of notification of the [decision]... This payment will constitute the final settlement of the case...”

The Court takes note of the agreement reached between the parties. It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols and considers that there is no reason which would justify the continuation of the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court).

Accordingly, the case 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 Georg Ress Registrar President