CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG23
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 16 mars 2010
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0316DEC006118609
- Date
- 16 mars 2010
- Publication
- 16 mars 2010
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s83BE5C30 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super } .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 } .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 } .s4932091F { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDB6B63EE { width:176.94pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 61186/09 by Georgia against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16   March 2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Peer Lorenzen, President,   Renate Jaeger,   Anatoly Kovler,   Mark Villiger,   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges, and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar , Having regard to the submissions of 16 November 2009 by the Government of Georgia, processed under file n o 61189/09, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE On 16 November 2009, the Government of Georgia requested the Court to “demand the Russian Federation 1) to comply with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, including the decision of the Court of 12   August   2008 [to apply rule 39 of the Rules of Court (interim measures)] and 2) to ensure prompt and unconditional release of four Georgian minors in custody of the proxy regime in Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia.” On 24 November and 8 December 2009, the President decided to adjourn the decision on the application of Rule 39 requesting further information from the parties concerning the detention conditions of these minors. The   parties replied on 3 and 11 December 2009 respectively. Following two visits to South Ossetia by the Human Rights   Commissioner of the Council of Europe, the four Georgian minors and a further one who had been previously detained were released on 2 and 21 December 2009. On 21 December 2009, the President informed the parties that there was no need to rule on the request of the Government of Georgia of 16   November 2009 for interim measures. Furthermore, the Government of Georgia were invited to inform the Court by 30 January 2010 whether they wished to maintain their application. On 29 January 2010, the Government of Georgia informed the Court that they no longer wished to maintain the above application. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. In view of the above, it is appropriate 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  Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG
- Formation
- 23
- Date
- 16 mars 2010
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:0316DEC006118609
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral