SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 42873/06 Ä°STANBUL SÃœRYAN Ä° KATOL Ä° K VAKF I against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 6 November 2018 as a Committee composed of:

Ledi Bianku, President, Jon Fridrik Kjølbro, Ivana Jelić, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 October 2006,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. The applicant, Istanbul Süryani Katolik Vakfı (“the applicant foundation”), is a religious foundation which has its seat in Istanbul. It was represented before the Court by Mr R. Nergiz and Mr E. Dora, lawyers practising in Istanbul and Ankara, respectively.

2. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

3. The applicant foundation complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the annulment of its right of usufruct on the property it used as a church, following the request of the Directorate General of Foundations (“the Directorate”) to that effect.

4. On 2 May 2017 the Government were given notice of the application.

5. O n 5 July 2018 the Government informed the Court that they had reached a settlement with the applicant foundation. In that connection, they submitted a letter sent to the Directorate by the applicant foundation, whereby the latter undertook to withdraw its application before the Court on the condition that the Directorate established a forty-nine-year usufruct in its favour. The Government also submitted the decision of the Directorate dated 25 June 2018 accepting the applicant foundation ’ s request.

6. On 18 September 2018 the Court received a letter from the applicant foundation stating that the Directorate had allocated the property at issue to its use and that it wished to withdraw the present application as the matter has been resolved. It also waived any further claims against Turkey in respect of the costs and expenses.

THE LAW

7. In the light of the above, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine .

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.

Done in English and notified in writing on 29 November 2018 .

Hasan Bakırcı Ledi Bianku Deputy Registrar President