THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 36236/07
by Dan COZA and Margareta COZA
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 11 January 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Elisabet Fura, President,
Boštjan M. Zupančič,
Ineta Ziemele, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 August 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Dan Coza and Ms. Margareta Coza, Romanian nationals who were born in 1952 and 1932 respectively and live in Canada. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Răzvan Horaţiu Radu, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 of the Convention and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the compensation mechanism set out by the restitution laws were communicated to the Government, who on 24 September 2009 submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations by 15 December 2009. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
However, on 17 May 2010, the applicants wrote a letter to the Court inquiring about the stage of the proceedings in their case, while indicating a new correspondence address. Consequently, on 29 June 2010 the Registry has sent them to the indicated address another letter, inviting them to submit observations in reply and just satisfaction claims. The Government’ observations were appended and the new deadline was set for 9 August 2010. No reply was received to this letter.
By letter dated 4 October 2010, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for the submission of their observations had expired on 9 August 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ attention was drawn to Article § 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. The letter remained unclaimed by the applicants and no response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their 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.
Marialena TsirliElisabet Fura
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy