CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 5 janvier 2016

.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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sBF964C40 { width:8.54pt; display:inline-block } .sD7DE76AD { width:201.77pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 11817/10 Larisa Valentinovna RYAPOSOVA against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5   January 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Khanlar Hajiyev, President,   Faris Vehabović,   Carlo Ranzoni, judges, and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 February 2010, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Ms Larisa Valentinovna Ryaposova, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1969 and is detained in Mariupol. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that she had been tortured by the police with the aim of extracting her confession. The applicant also complained under the same provision that she had not been provided with medical assistance during her detention at a police detention facility (“ITT”) and at a pre-trial detention facility (“SIZO”). Relying on Article 6 of the Convention, the applicant complained about the unfairness of the criminal proceedings against her. The applicant also complained under Article 34 of the Convention that the authorities had refused to provide her with the possibility to obtain copies of documents she had needed for substantiation of the application and that they had blocked one of her letters addressed to the Court. The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3, 6 §§ 1 and 3 and 34 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. At the same time the applicant was requested to appoint a legal representative before 6 January 2014. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. That request was repeated on 13   May 2014 without success. By letter dated 7 October 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was reminded that the Registry’s previous correspondence had remained unanswered, she was given another time-limit to submit the requested information and document before 3 November 2014 and her 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. The Registry’s letter was delivered on 17 October 2014. 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 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 28 January 2016.   Milan Blaško   Khanlar Hajiyev Deputy Registrar   President