FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 57485/09 I.S . against Croatia

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 4 March 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska , President, Linos -Alexandre Sicilianos , Ksenija Turković , judges, and André Wampach , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 October 2009,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 13 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

1 . The applicant, Ms I.S., is a Croatian national, who was born in 1960 and lives in Lovran . The President granted the applicant ’ s request for her identity not to be disclos ed to the public (Rule 47 § 3).

2 . The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Å . Sta ž nik .

3 . The application had been communicated to the Government .

THE LAW

4 . The applicant complained about failure of the domestic authorities to afford her adequate protection from an act of violence by a private individual given that the criminal prosecution against him had become time-barred . She relied on Article 8 of the Convention.

5 . After the failure of attempts to reach a friendly settlement, by a letter of 13 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.

6 . In their declaration the Government:

“(a) acknowledge that in the instant case there has been a violation of the applicant ’ s right to respect for her private life, guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention; and

(b) are ready to pay to the applicant 7,51 0 euros, to cover any and all non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

This sum will be converted into Croatian kunas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision by the Court pursuant to Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights to the account indicated by the applicant. In the event of failure to pay this sum within the said three-month 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. The payment will constitute the final resolution of the case.”

7 . By a letter of 14 January 2014, the applicant indicated that she was not satisfied with the terms of the unilateral declaration.

8 . 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”.

9 . 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.

10 . 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).

11 . The Court has established in a number of cases, including those brought against Croatia , its practice concerning complaints about the violation of the procedural aspect of Article 8 of the Convention with regard to the right to respect for private life (see, for example, Sandra Janković v. Croatia , no. 38478/05, 5 March 2009; Remetin v. Croatia , no. 29525/10, § 114, 11 December 2012; M.S. v. Croatia , no. 36337/10, 25 April 2013).

12 . 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 (see, for example, Remetin , cited above, § 114) – the Court considers that in the particular circumstances of the present case it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application (Article 37 § 1(c)).

13 . 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 ).

14 . In view of the Government ’ s undertaking, the Court considers that this amount should be converted into Croatian kunas at the rate applicable at the date of payment, and paid within three months from the date of notification of the Court ’ s decision issued in accordance with Article 37 § 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the event of failure to settle within this period, simple interest shall be payable on the amount in question at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank plus three percentage points.

15 . 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 8 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.

André Wampach Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska Deputy Registrar President