CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 3 juin 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 } .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 } .sBFD8E45 { width:185.97pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 1059/05 by Albert Leonidovich BABINTSEV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 June 2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Christos Rozakis, President,   Nina Vajić,   Anatoly Kovler,   Elisabeth Steiner,   Khanlar Hajiyev,   Giorgio Malinverni,   George Nicolaou, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 November 2004, Having deliberated, decides as follows: PROCEDURE The application was lodged by Mr Albert Leonidovich Babintsev, a Russian national who was born in 1969 and lives in Kirov. The Russian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Ms   V.   Milinchuk, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the authorities' failure to comply with the final judgment in his favour. The applicant's complaint was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations. They informed the Court, inter alia , that the applicant does not wish to pursue his application. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry's letter. By letters dated 25 June 2008, 9 September 2008 and 5 June 2009, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the his observations had expired on 23 April 2008 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. However, no response has been received. The applicant even failed to pick up the letter of 5 June 2009 at the post office despite the notice of the delivery. THE LAW 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 strike the case out of the list. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. André Wampach   Christos Rozakis Deputy Registrar   President