SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7807/06
by Tibor SZUNOMÁR
against Hungary
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on
12 October 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Dragoljub Popović, President,
András Sajó,
Kristina Pardalos, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 February 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Tibor Szunomár, a Hungarian national who was born in 1951 and lives in Székesfehérvár. The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr L. Höltzl, Agent, Ministry of Public Administration and Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of civil proceedings to which he was a party. The application 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 18 May 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the his observations had expired on 20 April 2010 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 applicant received this letter on 25 May 2010. However, no response has been received. In fact, no communication has reached the Court from the applicant's side since April 2006.
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.
Françoise Elens-PassosDragoljub Popović
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy