FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 38661/02
by Tetyana Anatoliyivna LYUBYNYUK
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 18 September 2006 as a Chamber composed of:
MrP. Lorenzen, President,
MrsS. Botoucharova,
MrV. Butkevych,
MrsM. Tsatsa-Nikolovska,
MrR. Maruste,
MrJ. Borrego Borrego,
MrsR. Jaeger, judges,
and Mrs C. Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 September 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 regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mrs Tetyana Anatoliyivna Lyubynyuk, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1963 and lives in Lviv. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Zaytsev.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In July 2001 the applicant lodged with the Lychakivskyy District Court of Lviv two separate claims against her former employer, seeking reinstatement in the position of accountant and recovery of salary arrears.
By two decisions of 17 December 2001 the court discontinued the proceedings on the grounds that the applicant refused to participate in the court hearings. On 18 March 2002 the Lviv Regional Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal against the decisions of the first instance court.
On 18 June 2002 the applicant appealed in cassation. On 5 July 2002 the Lychakivskyy District Court rejected her appeals as having been lodged out of time.
The applicant made several unsuccessful attempts to appeal against the decision of 5 July 2002. By decisions of 24 February and 7 July 2003 the Lviv Regional Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeals for non-compliance with procedural formalities.
The applicant appealed in cassation against the decision of 7 July 2003. There is no information in the case file concerning the outcome of her appeal in cassation.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the unfairness of the proceedings. In particular, she alleged that the courts had not been impartial, her representative had not been allowed to participate in the proceedings, and her appeal in cassation of 18 June 2002 had been unlawfully rejected.
THE LAW
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application on 27 February 2006. On 20 March 2006 the applicant was invited to submit her observations in reply. However, the Court notes that the applicant has failed to do so. Moreover, she has failed to respond to a registered letter dated 30 May 2006, which she received on 5 June 2006, warning the applicant of the possibility that her case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 examination of this application to be continued. Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be discontinued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy