CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 11 octobre 2001

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s20FDDAE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCA1147F8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sB8987CE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sBB5E682E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s377C1984 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sA918FEC8 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.4pt } .sBED5F98F { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s1255A1CE { width:26.88pt; display:inline-block } .s491E382F { width:206.81pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .s60570E66 { width:233.81pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 52339/99 by Mikhail SOLOVYEV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights, sitting on 11 October 2001 as a Chamber composed of   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   A.B. Baka ,   Mr   P. Lorenzen ,   Mrs   M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska ,   Mr   E. Levits ,   Mr   A. Kovler,   Mr   V. Zagrebelsky , judges ,   Mr   E. F ribergh , Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application introduced on 22 June 1999 and registered on 3 November 1999, Having regard to the communication of the case to the respondent Government on 14 September 2000, Having regard to the applicant’s wish to withdraw the case expressed in his letter of 19 January 2001 and the Government’s letter of 1 February 2001, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS AND COMPLAINTS The applicant, Mikhail Solovyev, is a Russian national, born in 1929 and living in Nalchik. Under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention the applicant complained that from 1996 to 1998 he did not receive his old-age pension in due time, and that his actions against the social security authorities in connection with the delays in his pension payments had been unsuccessful. In his letter of 19 January 2001 the applicant stated that he wished to withdraw the above application on the ground that he had no further claims against the Russian authorities concerning delays in his pension payments. By letter of 1 February 2001 the Russian Government informed the Court that they had undertaken effective measures to settle the application at the preliminary stage. The parties submitted a copy of an agreement between the applicant and the pension authorities of 19 January 2001 whereby the authorities had stated that they had undertaken to pay their debt in regard to the delayed payments of the applicant’s pension from 1996 to 1998, and the applicant had stated that he had no further claims in regard to delays in his pension payments. THE LAW The Court notes that the applicant wishes to withdraw the application on the ground that he has reached an agreement with the pension authorities regarding the matter raised in the application, and that he has no further claims against the Russian authorities concerning delays in his pension payments. Against this background, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved. By reference to Article 37 § 1 of the Convention, the Court considers that the case should be struck out of its list of cases. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Erik F ribergh   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President