CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 13 novembre 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 } .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 } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .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 } .s28D23796 { width:20.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9115381 { width:179.76pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 2911/04 by Josef KOPŮNEC against the Czech Republic The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 13   November 2007 as a Chamber composed of:   Mr   P. Lorenzen , President ,   Mrs   S. Botoucharova ,   Mr   K. Jungwiert ,   Mr   R. Maruste ,   Mr   J. Borrego Borrego ,   Mrs   R. Jaeger ,   Mr   M. Villiger, judges , and Mrs C. Westerdiek , Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 January 2004, 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 Josef Kopůnec, is a Czech national who was born in 1943 and lives in Brno. The Czech Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mr V.A. Schorm, Ministry of Justice.   The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 20 July 1994 the Brno Municipal Court ( městský soud ) convicted a   certain T.K. of theft and fraud and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment, suspended for a probationary period of four years. The applicant, who joined the criminal proceedings as a civil party, was referred to seek remedy in a civil suit. The applicant asserted his right to damages on 14 August 1995. On 12   September 1995 the Brno Municipal Court ( městský soud ) granted his claims for damages and delivered a payment order against T.K. who had to pay CZK   171,940 (6,257 EUR [1] ). Upon T.K.’s protest, the payment order was quashed and the case continued to be dealt with by the Municipal Court. On 24 March 1997, the applicant’s wife joined the proceedings. In a judgment of 21 April 1997 the Municipal Court ordered T.K. to pay CZK 107,640 (EUR 3,917) and CZK 51,125 (EUR 1,860) and discontinued the proceedings in respect of the remainder of the applicant’s and his wife’s claims. On 9 February 2000 the Brno Regional Court ( krajský soud ) quashed this judgment and remitted the case to the Municipal Court which, on 27 May 2002, again granted the major part of the applicant’s and his wife’s claims. On 26 September 2002 the defendant appealed. On 23   May   2005 the Regional Court upheld the Municipal Court’s judgment. On 19 December 2005 the defendant appealed on points of law. It appears that the case is still pending. COMPLAINT Invoking Article 6 § 1 of the Convention the applicant complained of the length of the proceedings. THE LAW By letter dated 3 August 2006 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 14 September 2006. By letter dated 27 July 2007, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations had expired on 14 September 2006 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s attention was drawn to Article 37   § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a   case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The letter was sent to the applicant’s address on 6 August 2007, the return receipt being signed by a certain R.Š. However, no response has been received by the applicant. His last letter to the Court dates back to 10 January 2004. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case. In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and to strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Claudia Westerdiek   Peer Lorenzen   Registrar   President   [1] 1 EUR = 27.48 CZK