CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 23 janvier 2018

.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 } .sF3B96856 { width:11.87pt; display:inline-block } .s330D47D5 { width:214.44pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 65504/14 Eleonóra MOJSEJOVÁ against Slovakia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 23   January 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Helen Keller, President,   Pere Pastor Vilanova,   Alena Poláčková, judges, and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 September 2014, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Ms Eleonóra Mojsejová, is a Slovak national, who was born in 1958 and lives in Košice. She was represented before the Court by Ms D. Holováčová, a lawyer practising in Košice. The applicant’s complaints under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention were communicated to the Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”), who were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Pirošíková. The applicant was notified of the communication of the case and invited to submit her observations by a letter of 30 May 2017 sent to her representative’s address stated in the application form. That letter was returned as undelivered. On 2   August 2017 another letter was sent to the applicant’s legal representative by registered post reminding her of the expiration of the period for submission of the observations and drawing her attention to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. The letter of 2   August   2017 was sent to the applicant’s representative’s address stated in the application form and in parallel to the representative’s address found on the website of the Slovak Bar Association. The letter sent to the former address was returned as undelivered. According to the information on the website of the French post accessed on 8 September 2017, the letter send to the latter address was delivered to the applicant’s representative on 9   August 2017. No response has been received to date. THE LAW The Court notes that the applicant or her representative failed to inform the Court about the change of address of the representative. It reminds that under Rule   47   §   7 of the Rules of Court the applicants shall keep the Court informed of any change of address and of all circumstances relevant to the application. Under Rule 44C of the Rule of Court where a   party fails to   adduce evidence or provide information requested by the Court or to   divulge relevant information of its own motion or otherwise fails to   participate effectively in the proceedings, the Court may draw such inferences as it deems appropriate. The Court considers that, in the circumstances describe above, 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 15 February 2018.   Fatoş Aracı   Helen Keller Deputy Registrar   President