BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Antonina Nikolayevna KOSTYUNINA v Ukraine - 16927/07 [2010] ECHR 2064 (16 November 2010) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/2064.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 2064 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
16927/07
by Antonina Nikolayevna KOSTYUNINA
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16 November 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Rait
Maruste,
President,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 April 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Ms Antonina Nikolayevna Kostyunina, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1952 and lives in Zaporizhzhya. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev.
The applicant complained under Articles 1, 6 § 1, 13 and 17 of the Convention about the length and the outcome of the proceedings in her civil case.
The applicant’s complaint concerning the length of the proceedings under Article 6 § 1 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 her own observations. However, the applicant failed to do so. Moreover, she failed to respond to a registered letter dated 1 February 2010 warning the applicant of the possibility that her case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
THE LAW
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 this application.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Stephen Phillips Rait Maruste
Deputy Registrar President
