SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 31741/96
by M.N.
against Italy
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section) sitting on 9 December 1999 as a Chamber composed of
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrB. Conforti,
MrP. Lorenzen,
MrsM. Tsatsa-Nikolovska,
MrA.B. Baka,
MrE. Levits,
MrA. Kovler, judges,
andMrE. Fribergh, Section Registrar;
Having regard to Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;
Having regard to the application introduced on 3 February 1996 by M.N. against Italy and registered on 5 June 1996 under file no. 31741/96;
Having regard to the reports provided for in Rule 49 of the Rules of Court;
Having deliberated;
Decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant is an Italian national, born in 1931 and living in Florence.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
The applicant is the owner of an apartment in Florence, which he had let to F.C.
In a writ served on the tenant on 7 November 1986, the communicated his intention to terminate the lease and summoned the tenant to appear before the Florence Magistrate.
By a decision of 1 December 1986, which was made enforceable on 9 December 1996, the Florence Magistrate upheld the validity of the notice to quit and ordered that the premises must be vacated by 30 June 1988.
The applicant started the enforcement proceedings and on 30 July 1989, the applicant requested the assistance of the police, but to no avail.
On 27 June 1997, the enforcement proceedings were still pending.
COMPLAINT
The applicant alleges a violation of his right of property and invokes Article 8 of the Convention.
REASONS FOR THE DECISION
The last letter sent by the applicant to the Commission was dated 20 June 1997. By a letter dated 19 July 1999, the Registry of the Court asked the applicant to provide updated information about the eviction proceedings. Having received no reply, by a registered letter of 9 November 1999, the Registry of the Court renewed its request for updated information and warned the applicant that, should such information not be received before 7 December 1999, the Court might decide to strike the case off its case-list. The letter could not be delivered, since the applicant appears to have changed address without notifying the Court of the new one.
In accordance with Article 37 § 1 c) of the Convention, the applicant must be considered to have lost interest in his application. It is therefore not justified to continue the examination of the application.
In accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.
Erik FriberghChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy