FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 76290/14
Daniel Stefanov KARALIYSKI
against Bulgaria
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 10 May 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Ganna Yudkivska, President,
André Potocki,
Síofra O’Leary, judges,
Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar.
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 December 2014,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Daniel Stefanov Karaliyski, is a Bulgarian national who was born in 1988 and lives in Vratsa. He was represented before the Court by Ms V. Dankova, a lawyer practising in Mezdra.
The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms K. Radkova, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 5 §§ 1 and 5 of the Convention that he had been detained by the police on 3-4 May 2012 and that although he had obtained a judicial declaration that his detention had been unlawful, the administrative courts had dismissed his ensuing claim for non-pecuniary damages in relation to it.
The Government, who were given notice of the applicant’s complaints concerning the lawfulness of his detention and his right to compensation for that detention, submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of these complaints.
These observations were sent to the applicant, who was invited to submit observations in reply, as well as any claims for just satisfaction. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 12 January 2016, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was advised that the period allowed for submission of observations on behalf of the applicant had expired on 23 November 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. Her 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’s representative received this letter on 18 January 2016. However, no response has been received from her.
THE LAW
In these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer intending to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Moreover, there are no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
It is therefore appropriate to strike the application out of the Court’s list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 2 June 2016.
Milan BlaškoGanna Yudkivska
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy