FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 43399/06
by Mayruddin Gebartoyevich KUTAYEV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 20 September 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Nina Vajić, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Peer Lorenzen,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Julia Laffranque,
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos,
Erik Møse, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 September 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Mayruddin Gebartoyevich Kutayev, is a Russian national who was born in 1985 and lives in Ivanovo. He is represented before the Court by Mr N. Brosov, a lawyer practising in Ivanovo. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 3 about the conditions of his pre-trial detention and, under Article 5, about its unlawfulness. He further alleged a number of violations of Article 6 during the preliminary investigation.
The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 5 were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations by 17 December 2010. No reply was received within the time-limit fixed.
By letter dated 3 March 2011 sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 17 December 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. His 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 21 March 2011. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court considers that in these circumstances the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his 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.
Søren NielsenNina Vajić
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy