CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 24 janvier 2008

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s61E420C2 { font-family:Arial; font-variant:small-caps } .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 } .s1D4E86C8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:11.6pt; text-align:justify } .s3B3A5DE9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s6477A72F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA1CDB767 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s281358E1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .sFD4D42B6 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s1913A4C6 { margin-top:6pt; 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 } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s1F648ADC { width:16.19pt; display:inline-block } .sD06E0939 { width:204.45pt; display:inline-block } .s9269B87C { width:9.86pt; display:inline-block } .sD1E7D622 { width:236.46pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 44907/06 by Viktor Andreyevich BOLSHUNOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 24   January 2008 as a Chamber composed of:   Christos Rozakis, President,   Loukis Loucaides,   Nina Vajić,   Anatoli Kovler,   Elisabeth Steiner,   Sverre Erik Jebens,   Giorgio Malinverni, judges, and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 August 2006, Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Viktor Andreyevich Bolshunov, is a Russian national who was born in 1936 and lives in Voronezh. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were initially represented by Mr P. Laptev, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their Representative, Mrs V. Milinchuk. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicant brought proceedings against the Social Welfare Authority of the Central District of Voronezh seeking to recover his pension arrears. On 18 October 2000 the Central District Court of Voronezh granted the applicant’s claim and awarded him 900.19 Russian roubles (RUB). The judgment remained unenforced until 9 December 2005. On 27 September 2007 the Government informed the Court that they had reached an agreement with the applicant in order to terminate the proceedings before the Court. The Government undertook to pay to the applicant RUB 22,180. This sum was to be paid within three months after the notification of the decision taken by the Court pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention. The applicant declared that, subject to the fulfilment of this obligation, he would not have any claims against the Russian Federation based on the facts of the application filed by him with the Court. The agreement stipulated that it could in no way be interpreted as recognition on the behalf of the authorities of the Russian Federation of violation of any provisions of the Convention and Protocols to it. On 7 November 2007 the applicant confirmed the above settlement. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgment in his favour. THE LAW By letter dated 27 September 2007 the Government informed the Court that they had reached an agreement with the applicant to settle the case. On   7 November 2007 the applicant confirmed the settlement. In view of the above agreement, the Government requested the Court to strike the case out of the list of cases. 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; ... 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 Court takes note of the fact that the applicant reached an agreement with the authorities and that, therefore, he no longer wants to pursue his application. Furthermore, the Court finds no public policy reasons to justify a continued examination of the application (Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention). In view of the above-mentioned, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the case out of the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.   Søren Nielsen   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President