FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 37342/07
Stanislav Oleksandrovych SAMOFALOV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 3 December 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,
Ann Power-Forde,
Helena Jäderblom, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 26 July 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Stanislav Oleksandrovych Samofalov, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1962 and lives in Kharkiv.
The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr N. Kulchytskyy, from the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant’s complaints concerning procedural violation of his rights during the trial under Article 6 § 3 (b) and (c) of the Convention were 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 10 September 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 10 June 2013 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. The letter was returned for having not been collected by the addressee.
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.
Stephen PhillipsBoštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy