SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 18068/05
Tatiana and Nicolae MARIANOV
against the Republic of Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 12 January 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Nebojša Vučinić, President,
Valeriu Griţco,
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges,
and Abel Campos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 April 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicants, Ms Tatiana Marianov and Mr Nicolae Marianov, are Moldovan nationals, who were born in 1932 and 1957 respectively and live in Cahul. They were represented before the Court by Mr G. Chiriacov, a lawyer practising in Cahul.
The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Apostol.
A final judgment obliged the local authorities to provide the applicants with social housing.
Before the Court the applicants complained about the non-enforcement of that judgment. They relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.
On 14 November 2007 the case was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 6 June 2014, sent by registered post, the applicants’ representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 22 April 2014 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ representative’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 applicants’ representative received this letter on 13 June 2014. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
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 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 4 February 2016.
Abel CamposNebojša Vučinić
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy