FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 75553/01
by Sergey Aleksandrovich BOLOTNOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on
9 February 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrsS. Botoucharova,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 May 2001,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Sergey Aleksandrovich Bolotnov, a Russian national, was born in 1930 and lived in Taganrog.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In 1992-1995 several metal garages were illegally constructed near the house where the applicant resided by residents of the neighbouring houses.
In 1996 the applicant applied to the Town Administration asking to demolish the garages. On 16 June 1999 the Town Administration issued a decision to demolish the garages. Since the decision was not immediately executed, the applicant sued the Town Administration before a court.
On 7 October 1999 the Taganrog Town Court ordered the Town Administration to demolish the garages and to construct a playground in their place. The judgment became final on 17 October 1999.
According to the applicant the judgment was not executed, whereas according to the Government it was executed in full.
The Government submitted that on 2 May 2003 the applicant had died.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained that the judgment of the Taganrog Town Court of 7 October 1999 had not been executed. He referred to Articles 2, 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention.
THE LAW
The Court notes that in their observations on the admissibility and merits of the case the Government informed the Court that the applicant had deceased on 2 May 2003. They enclosed a copy of the death certificate. The Court notes that it received no correspondence from the applicant after September 2002. It further notes that on 28 July 2005 it sent the Government’s observations to the applicant’s address. However, it received no reply and no appropriate person expressed the intention to pursue the applicant’s complaint before the Court. 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 examination of the application to be continued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy