CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG27
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 mai 2013
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0514DEC000379304
- Date
- 14 mai 2013
- Publication
- 14 mai 2013
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 } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .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 } .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 } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s260B30F2 { width:16.02pt; display:inline-block } .sAF759458 { width:174.62pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 3793/04 S.C. LYON SERV S.R.L. against Romania The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 14   May   2013 as a Committee composed of:   Alvina Gyulumyan, President,   Kristina Pardalos,   Johannes Silvis, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 November 2003, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, S.C. Lyon Serv S.R.L., is a Romanian limited liability company, having its headquarters in Drobeta-Turnu-Severin. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their   Agent, Ms Irina Cambrea, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The applicant company complained under Article   6   §   1 of the Convention about the infringement of its right of access to court and the excessive length of the commercial proceedings. Under Article   14 in conjunction with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention it complained about a difference of treatment between itself and AVAS, a governmental authority, with respect to the payment of court fees. The applicant company’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant company, who was invited to submit its own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 20 January 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant company was notified that the period allowed for submission of its   observations had expired on 10 January 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant company’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. The applicant company received this letter on 30 January 2012. However, no response has been received. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant company may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue its 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.   Marialena Tsirli   Alvina Gyulumyan   Deputy Registrar   PresidentCitations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 27
- Date
- 14 mai 2013
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2013:0514DEC000379304
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral