CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 11 juillet 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s6477A72F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s984A15CA { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s3B3A5DE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s2DF49AA6 { width:24.54pt; display:inline-block } .sD79BB263 { width:196.1pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 34221/03 by Radik FAKHRUTDINOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 11   July 2006 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   C.L. Rozakis , President ,   Mr   L. Loucaides ,   Mrs   F. Tulkens ,   Mrs   N. Vajić ,   Mr   A. Kovler ,   Mrs   E. Steiner,   Mr   K. Hajiyev , judges , and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 22   September 2003, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Radik Farkhetdinovich Fakhrutdinov, is a Russian national who was born in 1964 and lives in Kazan. The respondent Government are represented by Mr P. Laptev, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. The facts of the case may be summarised as follows. On 20   December 2002 the Vakhitovskiy District Court of Kazan allowed the applicant’s claim against the district administration for provision of municipal housing, for which he was eligible as a justice of peace. The court ordered the district administration: “...to grant [Mr Fakhrutdinov] a separate suitable flat taking account of his entitlement to an additional living surface... measuring at least 32 square metres.” On 20   January 2003 the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tatarstan upheld the judgment of 20   December 2002 on appeal. On 17   July 2003 the local housing authority informed the applicant that it had no funds to provide him with a flat. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Articles   6   §   1 and 13 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 about continued non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour. THE LAW By letter of 18   May 2006, the applicant informed the Court that he did not wish to pursue his application. In his submissions of 8   June 2006 he indicated that the judgment in his favour had been fully enforced on 23   May 2006. The Court takes note of the fact that the applicant does not wish to pursue his application. Furthermore, in accordance with Article   37   §   1 of the Convention, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention which require the continuation of the examination of the application. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President