FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 16098/03
by Galina Vasilyevna DEVYATOVA
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 2 March 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrsS. Botoucharova,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev, judges,
MrS. Quesada, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 April 2003,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together.
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Ms Galina Vasilyevna Devyatova, is a Russian national who was born in 1949 and lives in Bryansk. The Russian Government (“the Government”) are represented by Mr P. Laptev, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
On 3 October 2002 the judge of the First Circuit (мировой судья участка номер 1) of the Sovestkiy District of Bryansk awarded the applicant 25,068.57 Russian Roubles (RUR), to be recovered from the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. The decision has not been appealed against and entered in force on 14 October 2002. The court delivered the writ of execution, which was forwarded by the applicant to the defendant. However, it appears that the court decision remains unenforced for a certain period of time.
On 12 April 2003 the applicant brought proceedings before the European Court complaining of the lengthy non-execution of the court judgment in her favour. On 12 December 2005 the application was communicated by the Court to the Russian Government. In January 206 the applicant informed the Court that the outstanding amount due to her had been paid by the Ministry of Finance and that, in view of this fact, she did not want to pursue her application.
THE LAW
The applicant submitted that she wanted to withdraw her application because the outstanding amount due to her had been paid by the authorities.
The Court recalls Article 37 of the Convention which, in the relevant part, reads as follows:
“1. The Court may at any stage of the proceedings decide o strike an application out of the list of cases whet the circumstances lead to the conclusion that
(a) the applicant does not intend to pursue his/her application;
...
However, the Court shall continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto so requires.”
The Court notes that the applicant does not intend to pursue her application. Furthermore, the Court considers that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the case.
In these circumstances it considers that Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out f the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the application out of the list of cases.
Santiago QuesadaChristos Rozakis
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy