FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 28686/11
Kostyantyn Oleksandrovych PARSHYN
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 1 March 2016 as a Committee composed of:
André Potocki, President,
Ganna Yudkivska,
Síofra O’Leary, judges,
and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 April 2011,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Kostyantyn Oleksandrovych Parshyn, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1969 and is detained in Kyiv. He was represented before the Court by Mr S.M. Mas, a lawyer practising in Kyiv.
The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, most recently Mr B. Babin, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that the domestic authorities placed him in custody and extended his detention without relevant and sufficient grounds.
The applicant’s complaint was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 30 March 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 5 March 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested.
On 19 June 2015 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that business travel had prevented him from responding to the Court’s previous letters but that he intended to pursue the application. No further action or communication from him followed.
By letter dated 4 September 2015, sent by registered post, the representative was again reminded that the time-limit for submission of his observations had expired on 5 March 2015 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 representative received this letter on 3 October 2015. However, the Court received no response.
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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 24 March 2016.
Milan BlaškoAndré Potocki
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy