CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 27 juin 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 } .s30B3B394 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:left } .s1671C61A { width:169.18pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .sB62BA9AD { width:168.28pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 16421/12 Pavel Vladimirovich DOKIL against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 27 June 2017 as a Committee composed of:   Nona Tsotsoria, President,   Síofra O’Leary,   Lәtif Hüseynov, judges, and Anne-Marie Dougin, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 March 2012, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Pavel Vladimirovich Dokil, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1983. He was represented before the Court by Mr   R.   Borisenko, a lawyer practising in Kryvy Rig. The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 6   §   1 of the Convention were communicated to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”), who were represented, most recently, by their Agent, Mr I.   Lishchyna, of the Ministry of Justice. The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit the applicant’s observations in reply. No answer was received. By letter dated 1 March 2017, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 11 November 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. His 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 letter was delivered on 11 March 2017. 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 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 20 July 2017. Anne-Marie Dougin   Nona Tsotsoria Acting Deputy Registrar   President