SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22595/02
by Aleksey Ivanovich SHELPYAKOV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 8 November 2005 as a Chamber composed of:
MrJ.-P. Costa, President,
MrI. Cabral Barreto,
MrV. Butkevych,
MrsA. Mularoni,
MrsE. Fura-Sandström,
MsD. Jočienė,
MrD. Popović, judges,
and Mr S. Naismith, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 October 2001,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksey Ivanovich Shelpyakov, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1932 and lives in Kharkiv.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 5 February 1998, 22 March 1999 and 27 December 2000, the Moskovsky District Court of Kharkiv awarded the applicant a total of UAH 2,373[1] against the “Kharkovsky Electro-Mehanichny Zavod” State Company in salary arrears and redundancy pay.
In a letter of 15 November 2000, the Moskovsky District Bailiffs’ Service of Kharkiv (the “Service”) informed the applicant that the judgments remained unenforced due to the company’s poor financial situation and lack of cooperation with the Service.
According to the certificate issued by the Service on 6 September 2001 the judgments remained unenforced due to the debtor’s lack of funds.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of the court judgments given in his favour.
THE LAW
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant’s complaints on 9 December 2004. On 17 January 2005, the applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply. However, the Court notes that the applicant has failed to do so. Moreover, he has failed to respond to a registered letter dated 18 May 2005 and received by the applicant on 26 May 2005, warning him of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 examination of the case to be continued. Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should be discontinued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
S. NaismithJ.-P. Costa
Deputy RegistrarPresident
[1]. EUR 370.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy