FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 1405/06
by Azamat Raisovovich GARIPOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on
6 September 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 December 2005,
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, Mr Azamat Raisovovich Garipov, is a Russian national who was born in 1975 and lives in the town Uchaly in the Bashkortostan. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr P. Laptev, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant is a former military officer. On 29 June 2005 the Uchalinskiy District Court of the Bashkortostan Republic upheld his action against military unit no. 22745 and awarded him 186,248.85 Russian roubles in wage arrears. The judgment was not appealed against and became final.
In 2006 the military unit asked the District Court to review the judgment because the unit had not been notified of the proceedings and a representative of the unit had not been summonsed to any of the hearings before the District Court.
On 25 August 2006 the District Court re-opened the proceedings and quashed the judgment of 29 June 2005. Six days later the District Court dismissed the applicant’s action as unsubstantiated.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 14 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 about the non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour.
THE LAW
On 22 June 2006 the application was communicated to the respondent Government.
On 17 November 2006 the Government’s observations on the admissibility and merits of the application were received.
The Court asked the applicant to submit written observations by 23 January 2007.
On 20 December 2006 the English version of the Government’s observations was forwarded to the applicant. The time-limit for the submission of the applicant’s observations remained unaffected.
As the applicant’s observations on the admissibility and merits had not been received by 23 January 2007, on 26 April 2007 the applicant was advised by registered mail that the failure to submit observations might result in the strike-out of the application. No response followed.
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 to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that
(a) the applicant does not intend to pursue his 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 was requested to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the case. He subsequently received a reminder thereof. The applicant was also informed about a consequence of his failure to submit the observations. No response has been received to date. The Court infers therefrom that the applicant does not intend to pursue his application. Furthermore, the Court considers that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its 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 of 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 its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy