CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 11 janvier 2011

.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 } .s805476BC { width:149.27pt; display:inline-block } .s68C1165D { width:11.08pt; display:inline-block } .sF69F396A { width:193.88pt; display:inline-block } SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 45631/07 by Cem Tahir AKBAŞ against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 11   January 2011 as a Committee composed of:   Danutė Jočienė, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Guido Raimondi, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 October 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The application was lodged by Mr Cem Tahir Akbaş, a Turkish national who was born in 1962 and lives in Ankara. He was represented before the Court by Ms M.Z. Köksal, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. Relying on Article 6 § 1, Article 14 and Article 1 of the Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicant complained to the Court that despite the judgments given in his favour, the respective State authorities have still not paid the overtime work and annual leave payments that he has been entitled to. However, after communication of these complaints to the respondent Government, the applicant’s representative informed the Court, by letter of 20 October 2010, that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application since he has been paid the due amounts. 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.   Françoise Elens-Passos   Danutė Jočienė   Deputy Registrar   President