FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 44288/05
Margarita ŠIJAKOVA
against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 2 July 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Elisabeth Steiner, President,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Ksenija Turković, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 November 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Margarita Šijakova, was a Macedonian national, who was born in 1920 and lived in Skopje.
The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr K. Bogdanov.
The applicant complained under various Articles of the Convention about few sets of administrative proceedings. The applicant’s complaint concerning the right of access to a court under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention was communicated to the Government.
On 16 January 2012 the Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. On 25 January 2012 these were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit observations in reply by 7 March 2012. In the absence of a reply, on 3 September 2012 the Registry warned the applicant, with a letter sent by registered mail, that the time-limit to reply to the Government’s observations had already expired. On 5 October 2012 this letter returned to the Court as undelivered. On 12 February 2013 the Registry’s second letter, sent by registered mail, containing a warning that the time-limit for her reply had expired, returned to the Court as undelivered with a postal note that the applicant had deceased. No heir expressed an interest to pursue the application.
THE LAW
The Court notes that the applicant has deceased and that no heirs wish to pursue the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 of the Convention. In view of the foregoing and in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds that there are no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the cases.
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.
André WampachElisabeth Steiner
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy