FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 35911/05
by Anatoliy Vasilyevich DYAKONOV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 7 July 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
and Stephen Phillips, ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 September 2005,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Anatoliy Vasilyevich Dyakonov, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1941 and lives in Yenakiyevo. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev.
On 15 October 2008 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint concerning the non-enforcement of the judgment of 6 October 1998 by which the Yenakiyevo Court ordered the State-owned company Yunny Communar (шахта «Юний комунар») to pay the applicant UAH 5,261.37 in salary arrears and other payments.
On 6 and 16 April 2009 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Ukraine in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to execute the judgment of the Yenakiyevo Court of 6 October 1998 and to pay the applicant 3,000 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Ukrainian hryvnas at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum would 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 undertook 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 would constitute the final resolution of the case.
THE LAW
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.
	Stephen Phillips	Peer Lorenzen
	Deputy Registrar	President