CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG5
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 9 novembre 2010
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1109DEC000545105
- Date
- 9 novembre 2010
- Publication
- 9 novembre 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 } .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 } .sE7C30868 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sD855FCBB { width:140.54pt; display:inline-block } .s576DFC5F { width:15.93pt; display:inline-block } .sAA5C5B93 { width:187.63pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 5451/05 by Hüseyin GÖKÇEARSLAN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 9   November 2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Françoise Tulkens, President,   Ireneu Cabral Barreto,   Işıl Karakaş, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 31 January 2005, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The application was lodged by Mr Hüseyin Gökçearslan, a Turkish national who was born in 1944 and lives in Ankara. He was represented before the Court by Mr Ünsal Özdoğan, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr   H.   Ulusoy, Deputy Permanent Representative. The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention about the excessive length of domestic proceedings and under Article 1 of Protocol   No.   1 to the Convention about the violation of his right to peaceful enjoyment of property. On 21 October 2009 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints detailed above. On 12 April 2010 the Government submitted to the Registry their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. These were forwarded on 20 April 2010 to the applicant, who was invited to submit observations in reply. On 27 May 2010 the applicant submitted his observations accompanied by a proposal for friendly settlement. However, on 31 May 2010 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application, submitting a letter from the applicant which gave him authorisation to do so. 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 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. Françoise Elens-Passos   Françoise Tulkens   Deputy 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
- 5
- Date
- 9 novembre 2010
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2010:1109DEC000545105
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral