THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 3793/04
S.C. LYON SERV S.R.L.
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14 May 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Alvina Gyulumyan, President,
Kristina Pardalos,
Johannes Silvis, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 November 2003,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, S.C. Lyon Serv S.R.L., is a Romanian limited liability company, having its headquarters in Drobeta-Turnu-Severin.
The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Irina Cambrea, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant company complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the infringement of its right of access to court and the excessive length of the commercial proceedings. Under Article 14 in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention it complained about a difference of treatment between itself and AVAS, a governmental authority, with respect to the payment of court fees.
The applicant company’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant company, who was invited to submit its own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 20 January 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant company was notified that the period allowed for submission of its observations had expired on 10 January 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant company’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 applicant company received this letter on 30 January 2012. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant company may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue its 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.
Marialena TsirliAlvina Gyulumyan
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy