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 >> Bogdan Vasylyovych DMYTRYK v Ukraine - 12252/09 [2011] ECHR 724 (12 April 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/724.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 724 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
12252/09
by Bogdan Vasylyovych DMYTRYK
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 12 April 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan
M. Zupančič,
President,
Ganna
Yudkivska,
Angelika
Nußberger,
judges,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 February 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Bogdan Vasylyovych Dmytryk, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1973 and lives in Novyy Kalyniv.
The applicant complained about non-enforcement of a judgment in his favour.
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted a unilateral declaration on 28 May 2010. By a letter of 28 June 2010 the applicant was invited to submit his comments on the declaration. However, the applicant failed to do so. Moreover, he failed to respond to a registered letter dated 22 September 2010 warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
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.
Stephen Phillips Boštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy
Registrar President