SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 26173/10
by Avtandil SANAMASHVILI
against Georgia
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 14 December 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Danutė Jočienė, President,
Nona Tsotsoria,
Guido Raimondi, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 May 2010,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and to the applicant’s letter of 4 November 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Avtandil Sanamashvili, is a Georgian national who was born in 1978 and is currently detained in Tbilisi no. 10 prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr Davit Jinjolava, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Levan Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice.
On 18 May 2010 the Court gave notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the lack of treatment for his viral hepatitis C (HCV) in prison.
On 8 September 2010 the Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application, which included medical information on the applicant’s state of health. Those submissions disclosed that the applicant had started receiving the relevant anti-HCV treatment.
By a letter of 4 November 2010, the applicant, instead of submitting his claims for just satisfaction, informed the Court that the matter giving rise to his application had been resolved. He explained that, as a result of the Court’s urgent and effective intervention, the relevant authorities had dispensed with the requisite treatment and that the purpose of his application has thus been fully achieved.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that 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.
Françoise Elens-PassosDanutė Jočienė Deputy Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy