by Galina Nikolayevna MYASNIKOVA
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 7 May 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Sverre Erik Jebens,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 November 2003,
Having regard to the formal declarations accepting a friendly settlement of the case,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Ms Galina Nikolayevna Myasnikova, is a Russian national who was born in 1951 and lives in Orsk. She was represented before the Court by Mr S. Kiryukhin, a lawyer practising in Orsk. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr P. Laptev, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
On 15 April 2003 the Leninskiy District Court of Orsk awarded the applicant damages against the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Finance. This judgment became binding on 28 April 2003, but its enforcement was delayed.
The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention, and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the delayed enforcement of the judgment.
On 15 November 2006 the Government and the applicant signed a friendly-settlement agreement that read as follows:
“(a) Due to humanitarian considerations and interests of respect of human rights, the authorities of the Russian Federation will pay to the applicant the sum of 2,500 euros and all the taxes and charges, which can be added to the above sum, to be converted into Russian roubles at the rate applicable on the date of payment, for legal costs incurred in the proceedings before the [Court]. It will be payable within three months after the notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention.
(b) The applicant declares that, subject to the fulfilment of what is stated under (a), she has no further claims against the Russian Federation based on the facts of the application filed by her with the [Court].
The present settlement will 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.
Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis