FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 39000/06
Aleksandr Sergeyevich TSARAKHOV and Sergey Nikolayevich MARTYANOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 6 October 2015 as a Committee composed of:
Khanlar Hajiyev, President,
Julia Laffranque,
Dmitry Dedov, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 September 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicants, Mr Aleksandr Sergeyevich Tsarakhov and Mr Sergey Nikolayevich Martyanov, are Russian nationals, who were born in 1955 and live in Akhtubinsk. On 26 October 2001 they obtained binding civil judgment granting the right for pension. This judgment was executed until February 2006. By the judgments of 26 June and 4 July 2006 the Akhtubinsk Town Court granted the applicants’ claim to re-establish the payment of pension. These judgments remained unenforced. On 28 November 2006 Presidium of the Astrakhan Regional Court quashed the judgment of 26 October 2001 on supervisory review and dismissed the applicants’ claims.
The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about non-enforcement of a final domestic judgments in their favour and quashing of one of them by way of supervisory review.
By the letter received on 9 December 2009 the applicants informed the Court that domestic authorities restored their rights to pension and the execution of the judgments was re-established. Consequently, they were no longer wishing to pursue their application before the Court.
In its observations of 27 January 2010 the Government referred to the same facts as mentioned in the applicants’ letter and asked to strike the application out of the list of cases.
THE LAW
The Court notes that the applicants and the Government have reached a settlement without its involvement. The Court thus considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.
Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 29 October 2015.
André WampachKhanlar Hajiyev
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy