FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 52415/09
Irina Anatolyevna FEDOROVA
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 24 September 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Angelika Nußberger, President,
Ganna Yudkivska,
André Potocki, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 September 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Irina Anatolyevna Fedorova, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1963 and lives in the town of Krivyy Rig, Ukraine.
The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, most recently Mr N. Kulchytskyy, from the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained about the length of her civil proceedings.
The applicant’s complaints under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit her own observations and claims for just satisfaction. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 28 March 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 2 April 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’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 applicant received this letter on 13 April 2013. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.
Stephen PhillipsAngelika Nußberger
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy