by Dimitar Iliev KICHKOV
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 20 October 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 May 2004,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Mr Dimitar Iliev Kichkov, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1958 and lives in Kardzhali. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Ekimdzhiev and Mrs K. Boncheva, lawyers practising in Plovdiv. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Dimova, of the Ministry of Justice.
On 16 May 2008 the Court communicated to the Bulgarian Government the complaint concerning the failure of the State, until 2006, to provide the applicant with compensation for his expropriated property. The applicant further complained about the expropriation of his property carried out in 1987.
On 5 November 2008 and 2 September 2009 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under the terms of which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Bulgaria in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him 7,500 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses, which would be converted into Bulgarian levs 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 parties agreed that that 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).
Accordingly, it is appropriate to strike the application out of the list of cases.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Stephen Phillips Peer Lorenzen
Deputy Registrar President