CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 12 mars 1990

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }                        Application No. 12700/87                       by Franz HOLLITZER                       against Austria             The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 12 March 1990, the following members being present:                 MM. C.A. NØRGAARD, President                   S. TRECHSEL                   F. ERMACORA                   G. SPERDUTI                   E. BUSUTTIL                   G. JÖRUNDSSON                   A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                   A. WEITZEL                   J.-C. SOYER                   H.G. SCHERMERS                   H. DANELIUS                   G. BATLINER                   J. CAMPINOS              Mrs.   G.H. THUNE              Sir   Basil HALL              MM.   F. MARTINEZ                   C.L. ROZAKIS              Mrs.   J. LIDDY              Mr.   L. LOUCAIDES                Mr.   H.C. KRÜGER, Secretary to the Commission           Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;           Having regard to the application introduced on 16 December 1986 by Franz Hollitzer against Austria and registered on 22 January 1987 under file No. 12700/87;           Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 40 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;           Having regard to :        -   the Commission's decision of 12 October 1988 to bring         the application to the notice of the respondent Government         and invite them to submit written observations on its         admissibility and merits;        -   the observations submitted by the respondent Government on         13 January 1989, the observations in reply submitted         by the applicant on 13 March 1989 and his declaration         of 18 January 1990 that he wishes to withdraw the         application;           Having deliberated;           Decides as follows:   THE FACTS           The applicant, an Austrian citizen born in 1927 who resides in Vienna, is represented by Rechtsanwalt Dr.   Hans Pritz of Vienna.           He complained of a measure of rent reduction imposed on him as the landlord of a small apartment in the centre of Vienna.           Under Section 44 of the Rent Act which entered into force on 1 January 1982 (Mietrechtsgesetz, Fed.   Law Gazette No. 520/1981) the tenant of the above apartment requested a reduction of her freely negotiated rent of AS 2,770 to 150% of the legal square metre rent for class B apartments (AS 673,20) as from 1 February 1982.   The request was granted by the competent Arbitration Board (Schlichtungsstelle) of the City of Vienna on 22 April 1983 and subsequently by the District Court of Vienna City (Bezirksgericht Innere Stadt Wien) on 10 August 1985.           The applicant's appeal (Rekurs) was dismissed by the Vienna Regional Civil Court (Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen) on 17 June 1986.   Referring to a Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof) decision of 3 July 1984 (5 Ob 86/83=SZ 57/125) it rejected inter alia the applicant's submission that Section 44 of the 1981 Rent Act was unconstitutional.   COMPLAINT           The applicant complained that the rent reduction violated his right to the peaceful enjoyment of his possessions as guaranteed by Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention.   PROCEEDINGS           The application was introduced on 16 December 1986 and registered on 22 January 1987.           On 12 October 1988 the Commission decided to give notice of the application to the respondent Government and to invite them, pursuant to Rule 42 para. 2 (b) of the Rules of Procedure, to submit observations in writing on its admissibility and merits.           The Government submitted their observations on 13 January 1989 and the applicant replied on 13 March 1989.           The case was not further considered by the Commission pending the European Court of Human Rights judgment in the case of Mellacher and Others which concerned analogous rent reductions under Section 44 of the 1981 Rent Act.   In its judgment of 19 December 1989 (to be published in Series A no. 169) the Court held that such rent reductions did not violate Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.           On 20 December 1989 the applicant was informed of this judgment and invited to state whether he wished to maintain his application.   On 18 January 1990 he replied that he did not wish to pursue it.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION           Article 30 para. 1 of the Convention reads as follows:   "The Commission may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike a petition out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that:   a.       the applicant does not intend to pursue his         petition, or   b.       the matter has been resolved, or   c.       for any other reason established by the Commission,         it is no longer justified to continue the         examination of the petition.   However, the Commission shall continue the examination of a petition if respect for Human Rights as defined in this Convention so requires."           The Commission notes the applicant's declaration that in the light of the Eur.   Court H.R. Mellacher and Others judgment of 19 December 1989 (to be published in Series A no. 169) he does not wish to pursue his application.           The Commission finds no reasons of a general character affecting the observance of the Convention which would require a further examination of the present application.           For these reasons, the Commission           DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.   Secretary to the Commission          President of the Commission          (H. C. KRÜGER)                        (C. A. NØRGAARD)