FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 75168/12 Tamara Pavlovna GORBULINSKAYA against Ukraine

The European Court of Human Rights ( Fifth Section ), sitting on 20 May 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Angelika Nußberger , President, Ganna Yudkivska , André Potocki , judges , and Stephen Phillips , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 November 2012 ,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 2 December 2013 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicant ’ s reply to that declaration,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Ms Tamara Pavlovna Gorbulinskaya , is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1948 and lives in Nadezhdovka .

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

The applicant complain ed under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of excessive length of criminal proceedings in her case and lack of effective remedy, under Article 13 of the Convention , in respect of her grievances.

The application was communicated to the Government .

THE LAW

The applicant complained about the length of proceedings and lack of effective remedy in that respect . She relied on Article 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention.

After the failure of attempts to reach a friendly settlement, by a letter of 2 December 2013 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issue raised by the application. They further requested the Court to strike out the application in accordance with Article 37 of the Convention.

The declaration provided as follows:

“ The Government of U krai ne acknowledge the excessive duration of consideration of the applicant ’ s case before the national courts and lack of effective domestic remedies.

The Government of Ukraine offe r to pay to Ms Tamara Pavlovna G orbulinskaya E UR 3 , 780 (three thousand seven hundred and eighty euros) .

The G overn m ent therefore invite the Court to strike the application out of the list o f cases. T hey suggest that the present declaration might be accepted by the Court as “an y other reason” justify i ng the striking out of the case of the Court ’ s list of cases, as referred to in Article 37 § 1 (c ) of the Convention.

The above sum , which is to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage, as well as costs and expenses, will b e converted into the national currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may b e applicable. It will b e payable within three months from the date of notification of t he decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the above three-month period, the Government undertake to pay simple interest on it, from expiry of that period until settle ment , at a rate equal to th e marginal lending rate of the E uropean Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

This payment will constitu te the final resolution of the c ase. ”

By a letter of 7 February 2014 , the applicant indicated that she was not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declaration .

The Court recalls that Article 37 of the Convention provides that it may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to one of the conclusions specified, under (a), (b) or (c) of paragraph 1 of that Article. Article 37 § 1 (c) enables the Court in particular to strike a case out of its list if:

“ for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

It also recalls that in certain circumstances, it may strike out an application under Article 37 § 1(c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continued.

To this end, the Court will examine carefully the declaration in the light of the principles emerging from its case-law, in particular the Tahsin Acar judgment ( Tahsin Acar v. Turkey , [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75-77, ECHR 2003-VI; WAZA Spółka z o.o . v. Poland ( dec. ) no. 11602/02, 26 June 2007; and Sulwińska v. Poland ( dec. ) no. 28953/03).

The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Ukraine , its practice concerning complaints about the violation of one ’ s right to a hearing within a reasonable time (see, for example, Frydlender v. France [GC], no. 30979/96, § 43, ECHR 2000-VII; Cocchiarella v. Italy [GC], no. 64886/01, §§ 69-98, ECHR 2006 ‑ V ; Majewski v. Poland , no. 52690/99, 11 October 2005; and Pavlyulynets v. Ukraine , no. 70767/01, §§ 39-52, 6 September 2005 ).

Having regard to the nature of the admissions contained in the Government ’ s declaration, as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1(c)).

Moreover, in light of the above considerations, and in particular given the clear and extensive case-law on the topic, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application could be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention ( Josipović v. Serbia ( dec. ), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government ’ s declaration under Article 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention and of the modalities for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

             Stephen Phillips Angelika Nußberger              Deputy Registrar President