FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 5515/03
by Gennadiy Nikolayevich KORABEYNIKOV and Yevdokiya Mikhaylovna CHERNETSOVA
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 18 October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrL. Loucaides, President,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 November 2002,
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 applicants, Mr Gennadiy Nikolayevich Korabeynikov and Mrs Yevdokiya Mikhaylovna Chernetsova, are Russian nationals who were born in 1967 and 1929 respectively and live in the town of Zlatoust of the Chelyabinsk Region. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr P. Laptev, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicants alleged that a waterworks company owned and ran by a local council (Муниципальное унитарное предприятие «Водоснабжение и водоотведение» г. Златоуста) failed properly to maintain its water network which resulted in a continuous flooding of their respective houses for fifteen months. They filed a suit against the authorities in this connection.
By final judgment of 8 October 2002 the Zlatoustovskiy Town Court granted their claims and awarded the first applicant 20,234 Russian roubles (RUB) and the second applicant RUB 25,118 in damages.
It does not appear that the judgment has been enforced to date.
COMPLAINTS
Under Articles 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention the applicants complained about the non-enforcement of the judgment in their favour.
THE LAW
By letter dated 18 January 2007 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicants, who were requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 15 March 2007.
By letter dated 5 June 2007, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicants’ observations had expired on 15 March 2007 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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. No response has been received to the letter of 5 June 2007 to date.
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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and 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.
Søren NielsenLoukis Loucaides
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy