CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 24 mars 2015

.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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s4DFDBCC7 { width:188.96pt; display:inline-block } .sAE540E25 { width:21.87pt; display:inline-block } .s7DB8BC41 { width:183.09pt; display:inline-block }   FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 20722/07 Andrey Mikhaylovich KIRILLOV against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 24   March 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Khanlar Hajiyev, President,   Julia Laffranque,   Dmitry Dedov, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 April 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Andrey Mikhaylovich Kirillov, is a Russian national, who was born in 1971 and lives in Moscow He was represented before the Court by Mr A. I. Kadelchuk, a lawyer practising in Moscow. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr.   G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights. The applicant complained under complain under Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention that the proceedings for judicial review of his detention were excessively long. The applicant’s complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. On 23 June 2014 the observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on the applicant’s behalf. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 23 June 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 25 August 2014 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. However, no response has been received. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his 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.   Done in English and notified in writing on 16 April 2015. André Wampach   Khanlar Hajiyev   Deputy Registrar   President