THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 7469/17 MR-INTERNACIONAL SH.P.K. against Albania

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 9 December 2021 as a Committee composed of:

Dmitry Dedov, President, Peeter Roosma, Andreas Zünd, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 January 2017,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases, and the applicant company’s reply to this declaration,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant company’s details are set out in the appended table. It was represented by Mr F. Caka, a lawyer practising in Tirana.

The applicant company’s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions were communicated to the Albanian Government (“the Government”). Complaints based on the same facts were also communicated under other provisions of the Convention.

After unsuccessful friendly-settlement negotiations, on 30 September 2021 the Government submitted a declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints. They acknowledged the non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions. They further acknowledged that the domestic authorities had violated the applicant company’s rights guaranteed by other provisions of the Convention. They offered to pay the applicant company the amount detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amount would be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay this amount within the above ‑ mentioned three-month period, the Government undertook to pay simple interest on it, from the 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. They thus requested the Court to strike out the application.

On 23 October 2021 the applicant company informed the Court that it agreed to the terms of the Government’s declaration.

THE LAW

The Court finds that, following the applicant company’s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, the case should be treated as a 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 the Protocols thereto and finds no reasons to justify the continued examination of the application.

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 list of cases in accordance with Article 39 of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 13 January 2022.

Viktoriya Maradudina Dmitry Dedov Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention

(non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions)

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of registration

Representative’s name and location

Other complaints under well-established case-law

Date of receipt of the Government’s declaration

Date of receipt of the applicant’s acceptance

Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses

per applicant

(in euros) [1]

7469/17

16/01/2017

MR-INTERNACIONAL SH.P.K.

1999Caka Ferdinand

TIRANA

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of non-enforcement or delayed enforcement of domestic decisions

Prot. 1 Art. 1 - interference with peaceful enjoyment of possessions,

in respect of the delayed enforcement of the final judgments

30/09/2021

03/11/2021

2,750

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.