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 >> Ireneusz MAJSZAK v Ukraine - 38071/06 [2011] ECHR 874 (24 May 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/874.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 874 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
38071/06
by Ireneusz MAJSZAK
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 24 May 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 15 September 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ireneusz Majszak, is a Polish national who was born in 1978 and lives in Międzyrzec Podlaski. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms V. Lutkovska, from the Ministry of Justice.
On 30 August 2010 the applicant’s complaints under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits.
By letter dated 17 January 2011 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 28 February 2011.
By letter dated 30 March 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 28 February 2011 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. 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.
Stephen Phillips Boštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy
Registrar President