CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 8 décembre 2015

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sBAD0D18F { width:1.87pt; display:inline-block } .sC95ED60 { width:188.43pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 8508/05 Lyudmila Andreyevna STRIBUL against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 8   December 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Helena Jäderblom, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Branko Lubarda, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 February 2005, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Ms   Lyudmila Andreyevna Stribul, is a Russian national, who was born in 1941 and lives in Neryungri. As a holder of overdue commodity vouchers, the applicant sued the State and on 11   July 2003 the Neryungri Town Court granted the applicant’s claim. This judgment became final and enforceable but the authorities lingered in enforcing them. The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article   1 of Protocol No.   1 to the Convention about non-enforcement of the final domestic judgment in her favour. On 9   March 2003 the applicant’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted a unilateral declaration. The latter was forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit her comments. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 26   July 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her comments had expired on 7   June 2010 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 has been received from the applicant, who has not contacted the Court ever since. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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 7 January 2016.   Marialena Tsirli   Helena Jäderblom Deputy Registrar   President