CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 23 février 2016
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0223DEC002684114
- Date
- 23 février 2016
- Publication
- 23 février 2016
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.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 } .sF3B96856 { width:11.87pt; display:inline-block } .s65D33CE4 { width:185.75pt; 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 }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 26841/14 Constantin IONAŞCU against Romania The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 23   February 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,   Krzysztof Wojtyczek,   Iulia Antoanella Motoc, judges, and Fatoș Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 April 2014, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Constantin Ionaşcu, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1982 and is currently detained in Iaşi Prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr D. Afloroaei, a lawyer practising in Iaşi. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the inhuman conditions of his detention. The application was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 29 July 2015, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 30 June 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s representative’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. The applicant’s representative received this letter on 14 August 2015. However, no response has been received from him. A similar letter was also sent by registered mail to the applicant who received it on 6 August 2015. No response has been received from the applicant either. 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 17 March 2016.   Fatoş Aracı   Vincent A. De Gaetano Deputy Registrar   President    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 28
- Date
- 23 février 2016
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2016:0223DEC002684114
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral