CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 6 mars 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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .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 } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s5830ECD9 { width:0.2pt; display:inline-block } .sA16F6F64 { width:174.08pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 8883/14 L.H. against Hungary   The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 6   March 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,   Georges Ravarani,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 January 2014, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr L.H., is a Hungarian national, who was born in 1974 and lives in Csömör. The President granted the applicant’s request for his identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4). He was represented before the Court by Mr D. Karsai, a lawyer practising in Budapest. 2.     The Hungarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr   Z. Tallódi, Agent, Ministry of Justice. 3.     Relying on Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, the applicant complained that the levying of tax at a rate of 98% on part of his severance payment had amounted to an unjustified deprivation of property. 4.     On 6 November 2017 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaint detailed above. 5.     On 12 December 2017 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application. THE LAW 6.     In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, considers that the applicant does not intend to pursue his application. 7.     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 29 March 2018.   Andrea Tamietti   Vincent A. De Gaetano Deputy Registrar   President