THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 54834/07
Petr Alekseyevich SEREBRYAKOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 22 March 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helena Jäderblom, President,
Dmitry Dedov,
Branko Lubarda, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 September 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Petr Alekseyevich Serebryakov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1957 and lives in Arkhangelsk (region of Arkhangelsk). He was represented before the Court by Mr I.Yu. Telyatyev, a lawyer practising in Arkhangelsk.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained, inter alia, about the length of the civil proceedings in his case.
This complaint was 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 28 April 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations had expired on 27 March 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s representative’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 to the Court on 10 August 2015 as “not claimed by the addressee”.
By second letter dated 24 August 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 27 March 2015 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 also returned to the Court as “not claimed 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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 21 April 2016.
Stephen PhillipsHelena Jäderblom
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy