CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 16 mars 2010

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .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 } .s867F9C1B { width:175.28pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sCE735C95 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE188E4CB { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse; } .sA8950776 { height:56.7pt } .s41E9DBF5 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA22BE2CE { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s1C2B10C2 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sF2EF8B01 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s23CD0580 { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sDD8F0D07 { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s7BE5FA78 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s6A269875 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sEAD70FA9 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .s241BF43A { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:middle } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s85226119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .s3133A7C8 { font-family:Arial; color:#0069d6 } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Applications nos. 19018/06, 40398/06, 2344/07, 6197/07 and 7576/07 by PETRUK and OTHERS against Ukraine   The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16   March 2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Karel Jungwiert,   Rait Maruste,   Mark Villiger,   Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,   Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,   Mykhaylo Buromenskiy, ad hoc judge, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to five applications (see the Attachment), Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The applications were lodged by five Ukrainian nationals. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   Y.   Zaytsev. The applicants complained, mainly referring to Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and to Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, about the lengthy non-enforcement of final judgments given in their favour and a resulting breach of their property rights. The applicants’ complaints concerning the lengthy non-enforcement of the final judgments were communicated to the respondent Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. These observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit observations in reply. However, the applicants did not reply. By separate letters, sent to each applicant by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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 applicants received the Registry’s letters, but failed to respond [1] . THE LAW The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background. It also concludes, having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, that the applicants do not intend to pursue their applications. 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 applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the applications out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications and to strike them out of its list of cases. Claudia Westerdiek   Peer Lorenzen   Registrar   President   Attachment   No. Number/Name/ Date of lodging The applicants’ dates of birth and places of residence Dates of communication of the complaints to the Government Dates of forwarding of the Government’s observations to the applicants Expiry dates for lodging of the applicants’ observations/ Dates of the Registry’s warning letters sent to the applicants and dates of their receipt 1. 19018/06 PETRUK , Anatoliy Arsentyevich 5 May 2006 1937, Lugansk Region 3 February 2009 18 June 2009 30 July 2009/ 2 October 2009, received on 9 October 2009 2. 40398/06 KVASNIY , Semyon Yuryevich 12 September 2006 1940, Donetsk Region 10 February 2009 24 June 2009 17 September 2009/ 24 November 2009, received on 30 November 2009 3. 2344/07 RUBANOV , Vladimir Ivanovich 18 December 2006 1950, Donetsk Region 3 February 2009 18 June 2009 30 July 2009/ 2 October 2009, received on 19 October 2009 4. 6197/07 KUCHERUK , Rayisa Doremidontivna 1 February 2007 1958, Zhytomyr 30 July 2009/ 21 September 2009, received on 2 October 2009 5. 7576/07 RUDYK , Vasiliy Andreyevich 29 January 2007 1946, Lugansk Region 30 July 2009/ 21 September 2009, received on 28 September 2009   [1] .     For all details, see the Attachment.