the Court concludes that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application, that Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and that the case should be struck

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply and the case should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

to respond to the communications from the Registry of the Court, the last of which was a registered letter dated 3   July 2006 warning the applicants of the possibility that their case might be struck

has failed to respond to the communications from the Registry of the Court, the last of which was a registered letter dated 3 July 2006 warning the applicant of the possibility that its case might be struck

                        Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list

The police officers then used truncheons, sticks and gas bombs to disperse the crowd. The applicants were wounded during the incident.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

The police officers then used truncheons, sticks and tear gas bombs to disperse the crowd. Several participants were wounded during the incident.

The police officers then used truncheons, sticks and gas bombs to disperse the crowd. The applicant was injured during the incidents and obtained a medical report to that effect.

The police officers then used truncheons, sticks and gas bombs to disperse the crowd. The applicant was injured during the incidents and obtained a medical report to that effect.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Moreover, he has failed to respond to registered letters dated 17   November 2005 and 19 January 2006, warning him of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.

Moreover, he has failed to respond to a registered letter dated 6 September 2006, warning him of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list if he did not reply.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.