CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 23 juin 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 } .sBF964C40 { width:8.54pt; display:inline-block } .s87B0D865 { width:189.43pt; display:inline-block } .sAE540E25 { width:21.87pt; display:inline-block } .s7DB8BC41 { width:183.09pt; display:inline-block }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 48105/08 KOMPANIYA AMT, TOV against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 23   June   2015 as a Committee composed of:   Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,   Helena Jäderblom,   Aleš Pejchal, judges, and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 September 2008, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Kompaniya AMT, TOV, is a Ukrainian company based in Lviv. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that the proceedings concerning its commercial dispute were unfair in that the Supreme Court of Ukraine had overstepped the limits of its jurisdiction under domestic law. It further raised complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the length of the proceedings and referred to Article 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention claiming that the outcome of the dispute had not been lawful. The application was communicated to the Government as a subject of well-established case-law of the Court covered by the judgment Sokurenko and Strygun v. Ukraine (nos. 29458/04 and 29465/04, 20 July 2006) and the parties were invited to inform the Court, before 25 July 2013, whether they wished to reach a friendly-settlement in the case. On 9 September 2013 the Government submitted a signed friendly-settlement declaration. It was forwarded to the applicant company whose representatives were invited to inform the Court whether it accepted the settlement and submit its own declaration. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 30 October 2014, sent by registered post to the applicant company’s address, the applicant company was notified that the period allowed for submission of the information requested by the Court had expired on 25   November 2013 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. According to the return receipt, the applicant company received this letter on 11   November   2014. 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.   Done in English and notified in writing on 16 July 2015.   Milan Blaško   Boštjan M. Zupančič   Deputy Registrar   President