CASE OF KNICK v. TURKEY
(Application no. 53138/09)
(Just satisfaction - striking out)
12 June 2018
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Knick v. Turkey,
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Robert Spano, President,
Jon Fridrik Kjølbro,
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges,
and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar,
PROCEDURE1. The case originated in an application (no. 53138/09) against the Republic of Turkey lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a German national, Mr Dieter Claus Knick ("the applicant"), on 24 September 2009.2. In a judgment delivered on 7 June 2016 ("the principal judgment"), the Court held that there had been a violation of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention with respect to the deprivation of the applicant's shares in Demirbank, which was taken over by the State, and the lack of compensation (Knick v. Turkey, no 53138/09, §§ 43-48, 7 June 2016).3. Under Article 41 of the Convention the applicant sought just satisfaction for the damage he had sustained as a result of the violation.4. Since the question of the application of Article 41 of the Convention was not ready for decision, the Court reserved it and invited the Government and the applicant to submit, within three months, their written observations on that issue and, in particular, to notify the Court of any agreement they might reach (ibid., § 55, and point 3 of the operative provisions).5. On 4 January 2018 and 8 February 2018 the Court received friendly settlement declarations signed by the parties under which the applicant agreed to waive any further claims against Turkey in respect of the facts giving rise to this application against an undertaking by the Government to pay him EUR 631.42 (six hundred and thirty-one euros and forty-two cents) to cover any and all pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and EUR 100 (one hundred euros) to cover any and all costs and expenses. These amounts will be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable on the date of payment, and will be free of any taxes that may be applicable. They will be payable within three months from the date of notification of the decision taken by the Court. 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 the 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.
THE LAW6. Following its principal judgment, the Court has been informed that a friendly settlement has been reached between the Government and the applicant with respect to the latter's claims under Article 41 of the Convention.7. Having regard to its terms, the Court finds the agreement equitable within the meaning of Rule 75 § 4 of the Rules of Court and that it is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention or its Protocols (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention and Rule 62 § 3 of the Rules of Court). Consequently, it takes formal note of the friendly settlement and considers it appropriate to strike the case out of the list pursuant to Article 37 § 1(b) of the Convention.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
Decides to strike the remainder of the application out of its list of cases.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 12 June 2018, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Stanley NaismithRobert Spano