CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 9 décembre 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s4DFDBCC7 { width:188.96pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 38428/06 Edgar Vladimirovich MIRONOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9   December 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Khanlar Hajiyev, President,   Erik Møse,   Dmitry Dedov, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 August 2006, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Edgar Vladimirovich Mironov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1989 and lives in the town of Pskov. He was represented before the Court by Ms O. Semenova, a lawyer practising in the town of Orenburg. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. On 20   June 2007 the Pskov Town Court found the applicant guilty of several counts of robbery and sentenced him to four years’ imprisonment. On 12   September 2007 the Regional Court upheld his conviction on appeal. On 20   December 2007 the Pskov Town Court found the applicant guilty of several counts of robbery and a rape and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment. The court also indicated that the applicant was to serve both sentences concurrently. On 6   February 2008 the Pskov Regional Court upheld the applicant’s conviction on appeal. According to the applicant, the criminal proceedings against him were unfair and his detention on remand was unlawful. By a decision of 9 October 2012, the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints about various aspects of his detention on remand. On 7   February 2013 the applicant was invited to submit his observations by 11 April 2013. The Court did not receive any observations. By a letter dated 18 December 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired 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. No response followed. The letter of 18   December 2013 was received by the applicant on 6 January 2014. THE LAW In the light of the applicant’s failure to react to the Court’s letters dated 7   February and 18 December 2013, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. André Wampach   Khanlar Hajiyev Deputy Registrar   President