Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

RABUZA AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

Doc ref: 16116/06;30160/06;47396/06 • ECHR ID: 001-102557

Document date: December 7, 2010

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

RABUZA AND OTHERS v. SLOVENIA

Doc ref: 16116/06;30160/06;47396/06 • ECHR ID: 001-102557

Document date: December 7, 2010

Cited paragraphs only

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application s no s . 16116/06 , 30160/06 and 47396/06 by Gregor RABUZA and others against Slovenia

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 7 December 2010 as a Committee composed of:

Elisabet Fura , President, Boštjan M. Zupančič , Ineta Ziemele , judges, and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above applications,

Having regard to the Government ’ s settlement proposals made to the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants are Slovenian nationals who live in Slovenia .

The applicant M r Rabuza was represented before the Court by Ms B. Zidar , a lawyer practising in Celje . The applicants Ms Korošec and Mr Erkić were represented by Mr B. Verstovšek , a lawyer practising in Celje .

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

The applicants were parties to civil proceedings which were finally resolved ( pravnomočno končan postopek ) before 1 January 2007, that is, before the 2006 Act on the Pr otection of the Right to a Trial w ithout Undue Delay (“the 2006 Act ” ) became operational.

The applicants Ms Korošec and Mr Erkić s ubsequently lodged an appeal on points of law with the Supreme Court ( Vrhovno sodišče ).

The applicant Ms Korošec was also a party in another set of civil proceedings which were finally resolved less than three months after the implementation of the 2006 Act.

C OMPLAINTS

The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the excessive length of civil proceedings and under Article 13 of the Convention about the lack of an effective domestic remedy in that regard.

THE LAW

I n the present cases, the Court notes that, after the Government had been given notice of the applications, they informed the Court that they had made a settlement proposal to each of the applicants.

By the settlement agreements signed by the State ’ s Attorney ’ s Office and the applicants, the former acknowledged a violation of the right to a trial within a reasonable time and accepted to pay the applicants the non-pecuniary damage sustained and costs and expenses incurred . The applicants accepted the amount as a full compensation for the damage sustained due to the length of the above proceedings and waive d any further claims against the Republic of Slovenia in respect of this complaint.

T he applicant s subsequently informed the Court that they had reached settlement s with the State ’ s Attorney ’ s Office and that they wished to withdraw their application s introduced before the Court.

The Court recalls Article 37 of the Convention which, in the relevant part, reads as follows:

“1. The Court may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that

(a) the applicant does not intend to pursue his application; or

(b) the matter has been resolved;

...

However, the Court shall continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto so requires.”

The Court takes note that following the settlement s reached between the parties the matter has been resolved at the domestic level and that the applicant s do not wish to pursue their application s . It is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols does not require the examination of the application to be continued (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case s out of the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to join the applications;

Decides to strike the application s out of its list of cases.

M arialena Tsirli E lisabet Fura Deputy Registrar President

A NNEX

No.

Application No.

Applicant ’ s Name

Year of Birth

Address

Date of Introduction

Date of settlement proposal or agreement signed by the State Attorney

1.

16116/06

Gregor RABUZA

1972Dobje pri Planini

20/03/2006

17/09/2009

2.

30160/06

Hajdi KOROÅ EC

1979Celje

11/07/2006

30/08/2010

3.

47396/06

Marinko ERKIĆ

1953Velenje

06/10/2006

30/08/2010

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846