FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 9744/03
by Mariya Yakovlevna STEPANUKHA
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 18 October 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrL. Loucaides, President,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens,
MrG. Malinverni, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 February 2003,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together.
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mrs Mariya Yakovlevna Stepanukha, is a Russian national who was born in 1926 and lives in the village of Rassvet, the Anapa District of the Krasnodar Region. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr P. Laptev, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
By decision of the Prikubanskiy District Court of the town of Krasnodar of 2 August 2000 the applicant became the owner of one half of an estate in the town of Anapa.
It appears that this decision was not appealed against by way of an ordinary appeal procedure and on 23 August 2000 it came into force.
The applicant submitted that on 4 October 2002 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation quashed the decision of 2 August 2000 by way of supervisory review procedure as erroneous.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention and
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the outcome of the supervisory review proceedings in her case.
THE LAW
By letter dated 8 February 2007 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 5 April 2007.
By letter dated 5 June 2007, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations had expired on 5 April 2007 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. No response has been received in respect of the letter of 5 June 2007.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and 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.
Søren NielsenLoukis Loucaides
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy