CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 8 février 2007

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s6A074E04 { width:26.04pt; display:inline-block } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .s61ED8A2B { width:14.36pt; display:inline-block } .s84D0D60A { width:8.36pt; display:inline-block } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sB8084949 { width:138.49pt; display:inline-block } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2DF49AA6 { width:24.54pt; display:inline-block } .s13F20933 { width:194.44pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 22895/05 by Aleksey BELOUSOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 8   February 2007 as a Chamber composed of:      Mr   C.L. Rozakis, President,   Mr   L. Loucaides,   Mrs   N. Vajić,   Mr   A. Kovler,   Mrs   E. Steiner,   Mr   S.E. Jebens,   Mr   G. Malinverni, judges, and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 April 2005, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Aleksey Alekseyevich Belousov, is a Russian national who was born in 1963 and lives in Elista. 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, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 5 December 2003 the applicant sued the Federal Treasury, claiming that his detention on remand from 29 February 1992 to 26 April 1994 had been unlawful and asking compensation in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage. On 29 December 2003 the Gorodovikovskiy District Court of the Kalmykiya Republic allowed the applicant’s claims and awarded him 455,000 Russian roubles (approximately 12,475 euros) against the Federal Treasury. On 26 February 2004 the Supreme Court of the Kalmykiya Republic upheld the judgment on appeal. On 3 May 2005 the amount due was credited to the applicant’s account.   COMPLAINTS   The applicant complained about non-enforcement of the judgment of the Gorodovikovskiy District Court of the Kalmykiya Republic of 29 December 2003, as upheld on 26 February 2004. He also complained under Article 5 about unlawful detention on remand. THE LAW On 2 September 2005 the application was communicated to the respondent Government. On 28 December 2005 the Government’s observations on the admissibility and merits of the application were received and the applicant was invited to submit his written observations in reply by 9 March 2006. On 2 February 2006 the English version of the Government’s observations was forwarded to the applicant. The time-limit for the submission of the applicant’s observations remained unaffected. As the applicant’s observations on the admissibility and merits had not been received by the indicated time-limit, on 4 May 2006 the applicant was advised by registered mail that the failure to submit his observations might result in the strike-out of the application. The applicant received the letter on 23 May 2006. To date he has not replied. The Court recalls Article   37 of the Convention which, in the relevant part, reads as follows: “1.     The Court may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that (a)     the applicant does not intend to pursue his application; or (b)     the matter has been resolved... However, the Court shall continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto so requires...” The applicant was advised that he was to submit written observations on the admissibility and merits of the case. He was subsequently reminded thereof. The applicant has not replied to date. The Court further notes that the matter has been resolved at the domestic level and that the applicant appears to have no intention to pursue the application (Article 37 § 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention). Furthermore, it finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). Accordingly, Article   29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President