CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 11 mai 1992

.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. 15946/90                       by Abdullah ELAINOUNI and Chama LAAMRANI                       against the Netherlands           The European Commission of Human Rights sitting in private on 11 May 1992, the following members being present:              MM.    C.A. NØRGAARD, President                  J.A. FROWEIN                  S. TRECHSEL                  E. BUSUTTIL                  G. JÖRUNDSSON                  A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK                  A. WEITZEL                  J.-C. SOYER                  H. DANELIUS            Mrs.   G. H. THUNE            Sir    Basil HALL            MM.    F. MARTINEZ RUIZ                  C.L. ROZAKIS            Mrs.   J. LIDDY            MM.    L. LOUCAIDES                  J.-C. GEUS                  A.V. ALMEIDA RIBEIRO                  M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                  B. MARXER                    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 2 November 1989 by Abdullah ELAINOUNI and Chama LAAMRANI against the Netherlands and registered on 5 January 1990 under file No. 15946/90;         Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;         Having deliberated;         Decides as follows:           THE FACTS         The applicants are a married couple holding Moroccan citizenship. They were born in 1944 and 1960 respectively and are at present residing in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.   Before the Commission they are represented by Mr. E.M. van den Brom, a lawyer practising in Amsterdam.         The applicants have complained under Article 6 of the Convention that the decision to refuse a residence permit to their nephew, whom they consider as their adoptive son, was not taken by an independent and impartial tribunal.         The applicants have further complained that their right to respect for family life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention was unjustly interfered with by the authorities' refusal to grant their nephew a residence permit.         The applicants' nephew has recently been granted a residence permit by the Netherlands authorities.     PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION         The application was introduced on 2 November 1989 and registered on 5 January 1990.         On 2 September 1991 the Commission decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government and invite them to submit written observations on the admissibility and the merits of the complaints under Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention.         The Government's observations were submitted on 14 January 1992.         By letter of 14 February 1992 the applicants' representative informed the Commission that the applicants wish to withdraw the application.     REASONS FOR THE DECISION         The Commission notes that the applicants wish to withdraw their application, since their nephew has in the meantime been granted a residence permit by the Netherlands authorities.   The Commission concludes that the applicants do not intend to pursue their petition within the meaning of Article 30 para. 1 (a) of the Convention.   It finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require examination of the application to be continued, in accordance with Article 30 para. 1 in fine of the Convention.         For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously         DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OUT OF ITS LIST OF CASES.     Secretary to the Commission                  President of the Commission             (H.C. Krüger)                                 (C.A. Nørgaard)