FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos. 20158/07 and 25312/12
Aleksandr Borisovich PRIBYLOV against Russia
and Sergey Aleksandrovich KAMINSKIY against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 21 October 2014 as a Committee composed of:
Khanlar Hajiyev, President,
Julia Laffranque,
Erik Møse, judges
and Søren Prebensen, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on 19 March 2007 and 5 April 2012 respectively,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant in the first case, Mr Aleksandr Borisovich Pribylov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1971 and lived until his arrest in the settlement of Novoselki, Ryazan Region. He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Pilipenko, a lawyer practising in Ryazan.
The applicant in the second case, Mr Sergey Aleksandrovich Kaminskiy, is a Russian national, who was born in 1973 and lived until his arrest in the town of Roslavl, Smolensk Region. He was represented before the Court by Mr S. Grigoryev, a lawyer practising in Smolensk.
The respondent Government were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicants complained under various Articles of the Convention about unreasonable length of their detention on remand.
The applicants’ complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants’ representatives, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letters.
By letters dated 22 April 2014, sent by registered post, the applicants and their representatives were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 14 March 2014 and that no extension of time had been requested. Their 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 Court’s letters were delivered on various dates in May 2014. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
Having regard to the similarity of the main issues under the Convention in the above cases, the Court decides to join the applications and examine them in a single decision.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, 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 cases.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications,
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Søren PrebensenKhanlar Hajiyev
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy