FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 34167/04
by PEREVAL and Others
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 22 June 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Renate Jaeger,
Rait Maruste,
Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
Ganna Yudkivska, judges,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 September 2004,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by the limited liability company “Pereval” registered under Ukrainian law with its office in Volovets (“the first applicant”), Ms O. Koller, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1975 and lives in Volovets (“the second applicant”) and “Children's Soccer Club Atek”, a non-governmental organisation registered under Ukrainian law with its office in Kyiv (“the third applicant”). The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Zaytsev.
The applicants' complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the lengthy non-enforcement of a judgment of 24 January 2003 and the court rulings issued in the course of enforcement of that judgment were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility of the application. 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 29 January 2010, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of the their observations had expired on 22 December 2009 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants' 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 received this letter on 11 February 2010. 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.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy