The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on
3 December 1986, the following members being present:

                  MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President
                      E. BUSUTTIL
                      G. JÖRUNDSSON
                      G. TENEKIDES
                      S. TRECHSEL
                      B. KIERNAN
                      A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK
                      A. WEITZEL
                      J.C. SOYER
                      H.G. SCHERMERS
                      H. DANELIUS
                      G. BATLINER
                      H. VANDENBERGHE
                  Mrs G.H. THUNE
                  Sir Basil HALL
                   Mr F. MARTINEZ

                   Mr J. RAYMOND, Deputy Secretary to the Commission

Having regard to:

- Article 25 (art. 25) of the Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

- the application introduced on 29 May 1980 by A.P. against the
Federal Republic of Germany and registered on 2 June 1980 under file
No. 9026/80;

- the Commission's decision of 10 July 1981 to bring the application
to the notice of the respondent Government and to adjourn further
examination of the present case pending the determination of the
Öztürk case (Application No. 8544/79);

- the judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in the
Öztürk case - Eur. Court H.R., Öztürk judgment of 21 February 1984,
Series A No. 73, and Eur. Court H.R., Öztürk judgment of
23 October 1984 (Article 50) (art. 50), Series A No. 85;

- the Commission's decision of 5 December 1984 to request the
Government to state whether or not they would waive such objections as
they might have against the admissibility of the present application;

- the Government's letter of 26 February 1985;

- the Commission's decision of 11 March 1985 to invite
Rechtsanwalt Wiedemann to submit further evidence;

- Rechtsanwalt Wiedemann's letter of 1 April 1985;

- the Government's letters of 30 April and 18 June 1985;

- the Commission's decision of 6 July 1985 to invite the Government to
file, before 16 September 1985, such observations as they might wish
to make on the application;

- the Government's letter of 20 September 1985 requesting an extension
of the above time-limit;

- the President's order of 30 September extending the time-limit to
2 December 1985;

- the Government's letter of 6 December 1985 stating that they wished
to settle the case;

- the Government's letter, enclosing a copy of their letter to the
applicant's representative with a draft agreement, of 21 May 1986;

- the Government's letter of 4 June 1986 enclosing the agreement
reached between the parties;

Having deliberated;

Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant is a Greek citizen, born in 1953 and residing in Fürth.
In the proceedings before the Commission he is represented by
Rechtsanwalt R. Wiedemann, a lawyer practising in Nuremberg.

On 18 May 1979 the administrative authorities in Nuremberg issued a
notice of regulatory fine (Bussgeld) against the applicant on the
ground that he had committed an offence under the Bavarian Emissions
Act (Bayerisches Immissionsschutzgesetz).

The applicant lodged an objection (Einspruch) against this decision.

At the hearing before the Nuremberg District Court (Amtsgericht) on
19 July 1979 the applicant was assisted by an interpreter.

By its judgment of the same day the Court fined the applicant for
having committed offences under the Emissions Act and decided that he
should bear the costs of the proceedings.

On 15 August 1979 the Legal Administrator of the Public Prosecutor's
Office attached to the Regional Court (Rechtspfleger der
Staatsanwaltschaft beim Landgericht) of Nuremberg-Fürth assessed
interpretation costs amounting to DM 83.90.

The applicant's objection (Erinnerung) against this assessment of
costs was dismissed by the District Court on 17 December 1979.  The
Court held that Article 6 para. 3 (e) (art. 6-3-e) of the Convention
does not apply to regulatory fine proceedings.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained that he was ordered to pay the interpretation
costs.  He alleged a violation of Article 6 para. 3 (e) (art. 6-3-e)
and further invoked Article 14 (art. 14) of the Convention.

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION

The application was introduced on 29 May and registered on
2 June 1980.

On 10 July 1981 the Commission decided to bring the application to the
notice of the respondent Government and to adjourn further examination
of the present case pending the determination of the Öztürk case
(Application No. 8544/79).

On 5 December 1984 the Commission resumed its examination of the
present case in the light of the judgments given by the European Court
of Human Rights in the Öztürk case - Eur. Court H.R., Öztürk judgment
of 21 February 1984, Series A No. 73, and Eur. Court H.R., Öztürk
judgment of 23 October 1984 (Article 50) (art. 50), Series A No. 85.

The Commission decided to request the Government to state whether or
not they would waive such objections as they might have against the
admissibility of the present application.

The Government replied in a letter of 26 February 1985.

In accordance with their request the Commission decided on
11 March 1985 to invite Rechtsanwalt Wiedemann:

- to submit a recent power of attorney or equivalent document showing
that the applicant intended to maintain his application; and

- to adduce evidence that the interpretation fee of DM 83.90 was
indeed paid and, if so, to state whether the applicant personally had
borne it.

In his reply of 1 April 1985 Rechtsanwalt Wiedemann stated that the
interpretation fee had been paid by the applicant.  He enclosed a
recent power of attorney signed by the applicant and dated
29 March 1985.

On 6 July 1985 the Commission decided to invite the Government to
file, before 16 September 1985, such observations as they might wish
to make on the application.  This time-limit was at the Government's
request extended to 2 December 1985.

By a letter of 6 December 1985 the Government informed the Commission
of their intention to settle the case.

By a letter of 21 May 1985 the Government informed the Commission of
the terms of a draft agreement which they had sent to Rechtsanwalt
Wiedemann.

Under cover of their letter of 4 June 1986 the Government submitted
the agreement reached between the parties.

The agreement reads as follows (German original):

"V e r e i n b a r u n g

betr. das am 2. Juni 1980 von der Europäischen
Kommission für Menschenrechte registrierte Individualbe-
schwerdeverfahren No. 9026/80

z w i s c h e n

Herrn A.P., Kaiserplatz 1, 8510 Fürth, Beschwerdeführer,
vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt Dr. Richard Wiedemann, Nürnberg,

u n d

der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, vertreten durch Ministerial-
dirigentin Irene Maier, Bundesministerium der Justiz, 5300 Bonn 2

1.      Dem Beschwerdeführer werden die in dem Bussgeldverfahren vor
dem Amtsgericht Nürnberg - 46 OWi 223 JS 7921/79 - entstandenen und in
der Kostenrechnung 112 VRS 007221/79 unter Nr. 4 ausgewiesenen
Dolmetscherkosten von 83.90 DM zurückerstattet.

2.      Die Bundesregierung zahlt dem Beschwerdeführer zur Abgeltung
der ihm im Erinnerungsverfahren gegen diesen Kostenansatz und
anlässlich der Einlegung der Individualbeschwerde bei der Europäischen
Menschenrechtskommission entstandenen Kosten und Auslagen einen Betrag
von insgesamt 6oo,- (sechshundert) D-Mark.

3.      Die Beträge zu 1. und 2. werden an den Verfahrensbevoll-
mächtigten des Beschwerdeführers, Rechtsanwalt Dr. Wiedemann,
überwiesen, der sich verpflichtet, die Bundesregierung hinsichtlich
der Zahlung gegenüber dem Beschwerdeführer freizustellen.

4.      Der Beschwerdeführer erklärt die Beschwerde hiermit für
erledigt und ist mit der Streichung aus dem Register durch die
Europäische Kommission für Menschenrechte einverstanden.

Bonn, den 21. Mai 1986             Nürnberg, den 2.6.1986

gez. I. Maier                        gez. R. Wiedemann

(Ministerialdirigentin                 (Rechtsanwalt
    Irene Maier)                        Dr. Wiedemann)"

(English translation by the Council of Europe)

"A g r e e m e n t

concerning individual Application No. 9026/80, registered with the
European Commission of Human Rights on 2 June 1980

b e t w e e n

Mr. A.P., Kaiserplatz 1, 8510 Fürth, applicant,
represented by Dr. Richard Wiedemann, lawyer, Nuremberg,

a n d

the Federal Republic of Germany, represented by Mrs. Irene Maier,
Ministerialdirigentin, Federal Ministry of Justice, 5300 Bonn 2

1.      Interpretation costs of 83,90 DM incurred in regulatory
proceedings (Ref. 46 OWi 223 JS 7921/79) before the Nuremberg District
Court, as set out in the bill of costs (Ref. 112 VRS 007221/79) under
No. 4, shall be reimbursed.

2.      In satisfaction of the costs incurred by the applicant in the
objection proceedings to the above-mentioned bill of costs and the
costs incurred in the submission of the applicant's complaint to the
European Commission of Human Rights, the Federal Republic shall pay to
the applicant the sum of 600 DM (DM six hundred).

3.      The sums referred to in paragraphs 1. and 2. above shall be
paid to the applicant's representative in the proceedings,
Dr. Wiedemann, lawyer, who undertakes to indemnify the Federal
Government against the applicant in respect of the payment.

4.      The applicant declares that the application is settled and
that he agrees to it being struck out of the list of cases of the
European Commission of Human Rights.

  Bonn, 21 May 1986                   Nuremberg, 2 June 1986

  (signed) I. Maier                   (signed) R. Wiedemann

(Ministerialdirigentin                     (Rechtsanwalt
    Irene Maier)                           Dr Wiedemann)"

The Government state that they have arranged for the sum of DM 683.90
to be paid to Rechtsanwalt Wiedemann.  They refer to para. 4 of the
above agreement and request that the application be struck out of the
Commission's list of cases.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Rule 44 para. 1 of the Rules of Procedure provides:

"1.  Unless it considers that any reason of a general character
affecting the observance of the Convention justifies further
examination of an application, the Commission may strike it out of its
list of cases:

a.  where the applicant states that he wishes to withdraw his
application;  or

b.  where the circumstances .... lead to the conclusion that he does
not intend to pursue his application."

The Commission notes that the parties have reached an agreement on the
applicant's claims.  The Government request that the application be
struck off the list.  The applicant states that his application is
settled and he agrees to the Government's request.

The Commission finds no reason of a general character affecting the
observance of the Convention which, following the above agreement
between the parties, necessitate a further examination of the present
application.

For these reasons, the Commission

DECIDES TO STRIKE THIS APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.

Deputy Secretary to the Commission        President of the Commission

            (J. RAYMOND)                         (C.A. NØRGAARD)