THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 8420/10
Zakiya Gayfullovna LATYPOVA
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 26 January 2016 as a Committee composed of:
George Nicolaou, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Pere Pastor Vilanova, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 January 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Zakiya Gayfullovna Latypova, is a Russian national, who was born in 1937 and lives in Kirgiz-Miyaki (Republic of Bashkortostan).
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyuskin, Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complains under Articles 2 and 13 of the Convention that the authorities failed to conduct an effective investigation into her relative’s death.
The applicant’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. On 29 October 2014 the observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit her own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 4 May 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 5 January 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s 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 received this letter on 18 June 2015. 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 her 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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 18 February 2016.
Marialena TsirliGeorge Nicolaou
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy