SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 69713/10
Éva GRATZLNÉ NAGY and Józsefné NAGY
against Hungary
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 25 March 2014 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
András Sajó,
Egidijus Kūris, judges,
and Stanley Naismith Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 November 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicants, Ms Éva Gratzlné Nagy and Ms Józsefné Nagy, are Hungarian nationals, who were born in 1957 and 1959, and live in Budapest and Nyíregyháza, respectively.
The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr Z. Tallódi, Agent, Ministry of Public Administration and Justice.
The applicants complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the length and fairness of civil proceedings to which they were parties.
The applicants’ complaint concerning the length of the proceedings was communicated on 5 April 2013 to the Government who submitted their comments on the friendly settlement of the case on 27 May 2013. These comments were forwarded to the applicants, who did not reply. The Government’s observations on the admissibility of the case reached the Registry on 23 January 2014, in which they also requested the Court to strike the application out of its list of cases, since the applicants had not notified the Court of the termination of the case complained of and had not reacted to any communication in the case since 2011. These observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations by 20 February 2014. On 12 February 2014 the post returned the letter with the notice “déménagé”.
The Court observes that no communication has reached the Registry from the applicants’ side since 20 January 2011, and this in spite of several letters sent to them. Moreover, the applicants did not notify the Registry, despite a warning, of any change of their address.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their 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.
Stanley NaismithHelen Keller
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy