by Nikolina DURANSKA
against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 20 October 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 July 2005,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Ms Nikolina Duranska, is a Macedonian national who was born in 1954 and lives in Skopje. The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Lazareska Gerovska.
On 10 June 2009 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint concerning the lengthy non-enforcement of final judgment given in her favour. The proceedings instituted on 14 August 1999 are still pending. The applicant also complained that she had been deprived of the right to a fair trial as a result of the court’s refusal to admit certain evidence proposed by her and a failure to provide reasons for its decision.
On 31 August 2009 and 15 September 2009 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay her 3,000 euros to cover any non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Macedonian Denars at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and free of any taxes that may be applicable. This sum would be payable to the personal account of the applicant 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 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