THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7047/02
by Aleksandrs BOJARINOVS
against Latvia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23 August 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Josep Casadevall, President,
Corneliu Bîrsan,
Alvina Gyulumyan,
Ján Šikuta,
Ineta Ziemele,
Luis López Guerra,
Nona Tsotsoria, judges,
and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 January 2002,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksandrs Bojarinovs, is a Latvian national who was born in 1935 and lives in Rēzekne Parish. He was represented before the Court by Ms Ē. Lazareva, a lawyer practising in Rēzekne. The Latvian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms I. Reine.
The applicant’s complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 e) and 4 of the Convention concerning the legality and length of his confinement in a psychiatric hospital which lasted from July 2003 to April 2004 were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit his observations in reply before 8 November 2010. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By a letter dated 13 May 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired but that the President of the Section had agreed exceptionally to grant an extension. The representative’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. On 30 May 2011 the letter was returned to the Court because the recipient was not found. The applicant’s representative had not informed the Court of a change of her address.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
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.
Santiago QuesadaJosep Casadevall
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy