CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 septembre 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 } .s5830ECD9 { width:0.2pt; display:inline-block } .s3A429166 { width:181.77pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 9605/09 Aleksandre TCHUMBURIDZE against Georgia The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 13   September 2016 as a Committee composed of:   Krzysztof Wojtyczek, President,   Nona Tsotsoria,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 December 2008, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr Aleksandre Tchumburidze, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1968 and is currently detained in prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr L. Kupatadze, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice. 2.     On 7 May 2013 the applicant’s complaints under Article 3 of the Convention were 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 observations in reply on behalf of his client by 18 December 2013. No response followed. 3.     By letter dated 6 February 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired 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. In reply, the applicant’s representative submitted his belated observations in Georgian. 4.     By a letter of 17 October 2014 the applicant’s representative was informed that the President of the Section had decided, pursuant to Rule 38 § 1 of the Rules of Court, to admit his belated observations to the file. At the same time, he was invited, in the absence of a request to use the Georgian language (Rule 34 § 3 (a) of the Rules of Court), to send a translation of his submissions in one of the Court’s official languages before 14 November 2014. The relevant letter of the Court was sent by registered mail at the address of the applicant’s representative. No reply followed. 5.     On 11 December 2014 another letter was sent to the applicant’s representative reminding him of his obligation under Rule 34 § 3 (a) of the Rules of Court to submit, in the absence of the President’s authorisation to use the Georgian language, the necessary translation by 8 January 2015 at the latest. This letter was served at the address of the applicant’s representative on 17 December 2014. No response has been received. THE LAW 6.     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 (see, mutatis mutandis, Joaquín Ruiz-Giménez Aguilar v. Spain (dec.), no. 49022/09, 31 March 2015). 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 6 October 2016.   Andrea Tamietti   Krzysztof Wojtyczek Deputy Registrar   President