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 } .s701081D1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:left } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sE208486F { font-family:Arial; color:#ff0000 } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .sAEBB2DBD { width:150.95pt; display:inline-block } .s9B753B46 { width:198.3pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s86439055 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 46679/07 Vladimir Vasilyevich FEDKOV against Russia and 2 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9   December 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President,   Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos,   Ksenija Turković, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on 19 July 2007, 12   September 2007 and 2 October 2007 respectively, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. The applicants complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that they had been unfairly convicted as a result of entrapment by the police. The applicants’ complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter from any of the applicants. The Registry attempted to contact the applicants individually, as set out below. Their 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. By letter dated 14 February 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant in application no. 46679/07 was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 10 June 2013. On 6   March   2014 the applicant received the letter but failed to respond. No correspondence has been received from him thereafter. By letter dated 16 January 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant in application no. 48405/07 was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 20 September 2013. On 21   February 2014 the applicant received the letter but failed to respond. No correspondence has been received from him thereafter. By letter dated 28 November 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant in application no. 52651/07 was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 26 July 2013. On 19   December 2013 the applicant received the letter but failed to respond. No correspondence has been received from him thereafter. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, 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 cases. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.   André Wampach   Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska Deputy Registrar   President       APPENDIX   No Application No Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   46679/07 19/07/2007 Vladimir Vasilyevich FEDKOV 27/12/1961 Magnitogorsk       48405/07 12/09/2007 Anton Aleksandrovich CHALOV 24/07/1975 Ozersk       52651/07 02/10/2007 Artem Yuryevich BEREZIN 04/08/1982 Minusinsk   Denis Valeryevich SOLDATOV