THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 1168/11
Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich TABOLIN
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 6 December 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
Pere Pastor Vilanova,
Alena Poláčková, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 November 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Vyacheslav Aleksandrovich Tabolin, is a Russian national, who was born in 1983 and lives in Ukhta.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant’s complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 and 5 of the Convention about his unlawful detention and lack of compensation thereof were 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 12 July 2016, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 17 June 2016 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 10 August 2016. However, no response has been received.
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 12 January 2017.
Fatoş AracıHelen Keller
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy