CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 21 mars 2017

.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 } .sB57ABB22 { width:160.72pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 42342/06 Rodica POTEC and Sebastian PERNEA against Romania The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 21   March   2017 as a Committee composed of:   Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, President,   Iulia Motoc,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 26 September 2006, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicants, Ms Rodica Potec (the first applicant) and Mr   Sebastian   Pernea (the second applicant), are Romanian nationals who lived in Braşov. The first applicant died after lodging the current application and the second applicant expressed his wish to continue the proceedings both on his behalf and on behalf of the first applicant. The applicants were represented before the Court by Mr A.T. Moldovan, a lawyer practising in Braşov. 2.     The applicants’ complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning an alleged breach of their right of access to a court was communicated to the Government, who were represented by their Agent, Ms   C.   Brumar, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 3.     The second applicant failed to reply to the last registry’s letter of 23   November   2016 (received by him on 6 December 2016), reminding him that the period allowed for submission of his observations in reply to those presented by the Government had expired on 31 October 2016 and that no extension of time had been requested. His attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. THE LAW 4.     The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the second 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. 5.     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 13 April 2017.   Andrea Tamietti   Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque Deputy Registrar   President