European Court of Human Rights

FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 31155/04
by Djezair AZIR and Others
against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 2 December 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

Peer Lorenzen, President,
Rait Maruste,
Karel Jungwiert,
Renate Jaeger,
Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 July 2004,

Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case.

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants, Mr Djezair Azir, Mr Kenan Azirovski, Ms Melahat Azirova and Ms Ajten Azirovska, are Macedonian nationals who were born in 1955, 1958, 1961 and 1965, respectively and live in Skopje. They were represented before the Court by Mr D. Anastasov, a lawyer practising in Skopje. The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Lazareska Gerovska.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

On 4 December 1973 Mr E.M., both on his behalf and as a statutory custodian of the then minor applicants, brought a civil action claiming title of a property.

On 12 September 2001 the Skopje Court of First Instance accepted the applicants’ claim. On 22 January 2004 the Skopje Court of Appeal dismissed the parties’ appeals. The applicants were served with this decision on 19 February 2004.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention that their case was not heard within a reasonable time and that they had no effective remedy in that respect.

THE LAW

On 19 November 2007 the Court received the following declaration from the Government:

“I, Radica Lazareska Gerovska, Agent of the Government, declare that the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia offer to pay ex gratia 9,400 euros to be divided equally between Mr Djezair Azir, the first applicant, Mr Kenan Azirovski, the second applicant, Mrs Melahat Azirova, the third applicant, and Mrs Ajten Azirovska, the fourth applicant, with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

This sum, which is to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, will be converted into Macedonian Denars at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. It will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the 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 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.”

On 7 May 2008 the Court received the declaration, duly signed by the applicant’s representative, which read, inter alia, as follows:

“We, Djezair Azir, the first applicant, Kenan Azirovski, the second applicant, Melahat Azirova, the third applicant, and Ajten Azirovska, the fourth applicant, note that the Government of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are prepared to pay us ex gratia the sum of 9,400 euros to be divided equally between us with a view to securing a friendly settlement of the above-mentioned case pending before the European Court of Human Rights ... We accept the proposal and waive any further claims against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application. We declare that this constitutes a final resolution of the case.”

The Court 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 public policy 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 list of cases.

Claudia Westerdiek Peer Lorenzen
Registrar President