FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 21413/11
Y.K.
against the United Kingdom
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 4 March 2014 as a Committee composed of:
Ledi Bianku, President,
Paul Mahoney,
Krzysztof Wojtyczek, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 April 2011,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Y.K., is a Sierra Leonean national who was born in 1986 and lives in Clapham. The President granted the applicant’s request for her identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 3). She was represented before the Court by Ms A. Gonzales of Wilson Solicitors, a law firm practising in London.
2. The United Kingdom Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Addis of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
3. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that her removal to Sierra Leone would put her at risk of ill-treatment. She further complained that her removal would breach the United Kingdom’s positive obligation under Article 4 of the Convention as she claimed to be a victim of trafficking.
4. On 31 August 2011 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints detailed above.
5. However, on 12 September 2011 the President of the Fourth Section adjourned the case as the Secretary of State for the Home Department had undertaken to give fresh consideration to further representations made by the applicant.
6. The case remained adjourned for more than two years. On 6 December 2013 the Court wrote to the applicant, indicating its intention to strike the application from the list without prejudice to her ability to reintroduce it in future following the exhaustion of domestic remedies. By letter dated 18 December 2013, the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant agreed to this course of action.
THE LAW
7. In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application.
8. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list, without prejudice to the Court’s power under Rule 43 § 5 to restore cases to its list if it considers that exceptional circumstances so justify.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Fatoş AracıLedi Bianku
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy