CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;DECCOMMISSION;ENG — 31 août 1994

.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 }                          AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF                         Application No. 18971/91                       by Kauko TUOMAINEN                       against Finland         The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting in private on 31 August 1994, the following members being present:              MM.    A. WEITZEL, President                  C.L. ROZAKIS                  F. ERMACORA                  E. BUSUTTIL                  A.S. GÖZÜBÜYÜK            Mrs.   J. LIDDY            MM.    M.P. PELLONPÄÄ                  B. MARXER                  B. CONFORTI                  N. BRATZA                  I. BÉKÉS                  E. KONSTANTINOV              Mrs.   M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber         Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;         Having regard to the application introduced on 4 July 1991 by Mr. Kauko TUOMAINEN against Finland and registered on 22 October 1991 under file No. 18971/91;         Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission;         Having regard to :   -      the observations submitted by the respondent Government on       6 January 1994;   -      the applicant's death and the absence of any reaction on the part       of his estate to the effect that the application would be       pursued;         Having deliberated;         Decides as follows:   THE FACTS         The applicant was a Finnish citizen, born in 1926. He lived in Kurolanlahti. The facts of the case as submitted by the parties may be summarised as follows:         In October 1984 the applicant bought 77 hectares of land which later became the subject of redemption and compensation proceedings in the absence of agreement with the National Board of Agriculture. The applicant pursued unsuccessful litigation up to the Land Court and Supreme Court, when finally 371.177 FIM was fixed as final compensation to the applicant for the redemption of the land in question.   COMPLAINTS         The applicant had complained to the Commission of allegedly insufficient compensation, an unfair hearing and unreasonable delay in the proceedings. He invoked Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention and Article 6 of the Convention.   PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION         The application was introduced on 4 July 1991 and registered on 22 October 1991. On 13 October 1993 the Commission decided to request the respondent Government to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant's complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. The Government's observations were submitted on 6 January 1994. On 28 January 1994 these were communicated to the applicant for possible comments before 18 March 1994.         On 26 April 1994 the applicant was sent a registered letter drawing his attention to the expiry of the above-stated time-limit. This letter was returned by the Finnish Postal Service indicating that the applicant had died. On 20 May 1994 a registered letter was sent to the administrator of the applicant's estate inviting his heir or heirs to inform the Commission before 24 June 1994 whether he or they intended to pursue the application. On 10 June 1994 the Commission received an acknowledgement of receipt of its letter of 20 May 1994.   REASONS FOR THE DECISION         The Commission recalls that under Article 30 para. 1 (a) and (c) of the Convention it may decide to strike a petition out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue his case or that it is, for any other reason established by the Commission, no longer justified to continue the examination of it. The Commission shall, however, continue its examination of the petition if respect for human rights, as defined in the Convention, so requires.         The Commission observes that the applicant has died on an unknown date. In view of the absence of any reaction on the part of his estate, the Commission considers that the application is not being pursued by the applicant's successors. Moreover, in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for human rights, as defined in the Convention, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the case.         For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,         DECIDES TO STRIKE THE APPLICATION OFF ITS LIST OF CASES.   Secretary to the First Chamber         President of the First Chamber        (M.F. BUQUICCHIO)                        (A. WEITZEL)