FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 6669/02
Ion Şerban PONOVA
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 2 February 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque,
Iulia Antoanella Motoc, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 April 2001,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Ion Şerban Ponova, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1966 and lives in Bucharest.
The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant complained essentially under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention that his prolonged inability to use property over which he held a valid property title entailed a breach of his right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possession.
This complaint was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 19 November 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 6 October 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’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. No response has been received.
By letter dated 19 October 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified about the imminence of the examination of his case by the Court. In such circumstances and in view of the fact that the last letter received from the applicant dated from 10 May 2001, he was asked whether he still intended to pursue his application before the Court. This letter was received on 30 October 2014. No response has been received.
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 25 February 2016.
Fatoş AracıBoštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy