THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 49194/09
Nikolay Filippovich DEMIDOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 26 April 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
Johannes Silvis,
Alena Poláčková, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 August 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Nikolay Filippovich Demidov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1942 and lives in Angarsk. He was represented before the Court by Ms N.Yu. Shemetova, a lawyer practising in Irkutsk.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyuskin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the failure to enforce judgments in his favour in good time.
The applicant’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. On 15 June 2015 the observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 22 September 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 17 August 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s 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. The letter was returned to the Court as unclaimed.
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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 19 May 2016.
Stephen PhillipsHelen Keller
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy