SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 8793/19
Hristijan RIPILOSKI
against North Macedonia
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 9 November 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Frédéric Krenc, President,
Diana Sârcu,
Davor Derenčinović, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 February 2019,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Hristijan Ripiloski, was born in 1995. He was represented by Mr S. Videski, a lawyer practising in Prilep.
The applicant’s complaint under Article 4 § 1 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention concerning his right not to be tried or punished twice for the same offence was communicated to the Government of North Macedonia (“the Government”). The Government’s written observations on the admissibility and merits of that complaint were received at the Court on 17 April 2023 and were forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer two days later, via the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (“eComms”). The applicant’s lawyer was also invited to submit by 31 May 2023 written observations in reply on behalf of the applicant, together with any claim for just satisfaction.
The applicant’s lawyer downloaded the Government’s observations from eComms on 19 April 2023, along with all of the annexes. He did not file observations or a claim for just satisfaction on behalf of the applicant within the time-limit fixed for that purpose. Nor did he seek an extension of that time-limit.
In a letter dated 5 June 2023 and sent to the applicant’s lawyer via eComms on the same day, he was warned that the time-limit for submission of the applicant’s written observations and of any claim for just satisfaction had expired and that no extension of time has been requested; his attention was also drawn to the terms of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application
The applicant’s lawyer downloaded that letter from eComms on the same day but has not replied to it.
THE LAW
In the light of the above developments, and of the terms of Rule 37 § 1 of the Rules of Court, according to which “communications or notifications addressed to the ... advocates of the parties shall be deemed to have been addressed to the parties”, and of paragraph 1 of the Practice Direction on Electronic Filing by Applicants, according to which “after the communication of a case, applicants who have opted to file pleadings electronically ... shall accept written communications sent to them by the Registry of the Court by means of eComms”, the applicant may be regarded as no longer intending to pursue the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
There are, furthermore, no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine).
Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 30 November 2023.
Viktoriya Maradudina Frédéric Krenc
Acting Deputy Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy