FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 18604/07
Vladimir Yermolayevich FIRSTOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 26 November 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Khanlar Hajiyev, President,
Erik Møse,
Dmitry Dedov, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 December 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr Vladimir Yermolayevich Firstov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1959 and lives in Karatkansk.
2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. The applicant complained, among other matters, under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his post-conviction detention in a correctional colony.
4. This complaint was communicated to the Government, who on 24 May 2013 submitted their observations. By letter dated 18 June 2013 these submissions were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his observations in reply.
5. On 22 October 2013 the above letter returned to the Court as unclaimed or undeliverable due to a change of the recipient’s address.
6. Although the applicant knew that he had the obligation to inform the Court of any change in his address and about any major developments regarding his case, he did not provide the Court with his new address.
THE LAW
7. According to Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, 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.
8. The Court considers that the applicant’s failure to inform the Registry about the change of his address despite such explicit obligation highlighted in the Registry’s letters indicate that he has lost interest in the proceedings, 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.
9. 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.
André WampachKhanlar Hajiyev
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy