THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 47113/10 Romulus George DE PRATTO and Ana Maria Adela ȘTEFĂ NESCU against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 1 July 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Alvina Gyulumyan , President, Johannes Silvis , Valeriu Griţco , judges, and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 August 2010 ,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 27 March 2014 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicants ’ reply to that declaration,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicants, Mr Romulus George de Pratto and Ms Ana Maria Adela Ş tef ă nescu , are Swedish and Dutch nationals, who were born in 1951 and 1953 respectively and live in Padova and Paris . They were represented before the Court by Mr A. Zăbrăuţanu , a lawyer practi s ing in Bucharest .

The Romanian Government (“the Government”) wer e represented by their Agent, M s C. Brumar , from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the civil proceedings in which the applicants had been involved. The proceedings lasted for eight years and one month for three levels of jurisdiction.

On 30 August 2013, t h is complaint was communicated to the Government .

On 3 September 2013, the Dutch and the Swedish Government s were invited to intervene in the case . On 12 September 2013, the Swedish Government informed the Court that they do not wish to exercise their right under Article 36 § 1 of the Convention to intervene in the Court ’ s proceedings concerning the application . The Dutch Government did not provide any response.

THE LAW

After the failure of attempts to reach a friendly settlement, by a letter of 27 March 2014 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the application.

The declaration provided as follows:

“ The Government declares, by a way of this unilateral declaration, its acknowledgment of the violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 as regards the length of civil proceedings.

The Government is prepared to pay jointly to Mr. Romulus George de Pratto and Mrs. Ana Maria Adela Ş tef ă nescu as just satisfaction, the global sum of 1 350 EUR (one thousand three hundred fifty Euros), amount which it considers reasonable in the light of the Court ’ s case-law. This sum is to cover all damage as well as the costs and expenses and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum will be payable in Romanian lei at the rate applicable at the date of payment to the personal account of the applicant within three months from the date of the notification of the decision pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the Convention. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said 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. Therefore, the Government respectfully invites the Court rule that the examination of the present application is no longer justified and to strike the application out of its list of cases, pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. ”

On 5 May 2014, the Court received a letter from the applicants informing the Court that they had accepted the terms of the Government ’ s declaration.

The Court finds that following the applicants ’ express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government the case can be considered as an implied friendly settlement between the parties.

It therefore 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 reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its li st of cases pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention.

Marialena Tsirli Alvina Gyulumyan              Deputy Registrar President