CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 septembre 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sEEEC397 { width:146.09pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s8934192D { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA1463580 { width:121.66%; border-collapse:collapse } .s2C3CD8A1 { width:10.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sEB50D9DC { width:46.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s73886E1F { width:15.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sA4DC510B { width:16.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s89CDB242 { width:10.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s74DC3D21 { margin-left:33.01pt; padding-left:2.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-weight:bold } .sB81C1183 { width:46.16%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFC1536F8 { width:15.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sCCAF9AA9 { width:16.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 42624/09 Zareta Davidovna DZHANAYEVA and others against Russia   The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 13   September 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Alena Poláčková, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 July 2009, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants’ complaints under Articles   6 § 1 and   13 of the Convention and Article   1 of the Protocol No.   1 concerning the delayed enforcement of a domestic decision given against a State unitary enterprise and the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law were communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. By letter dated 9 August 2017, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations   had expired on 13 January 2017 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application 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 sent by registered post to the last known address of Ms   Zareta Dzhanayeva, the applicant also acting as the other applicants’ representative. The applicant failed to pick up the letter at the post office, and it was sent back to the Court after expiration of the storage period. A copy of the letter of 9 August 2017 was also sent to two electronic addresses of Ms   Z.   Dzhanayeva. However, no response followed. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the application (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 the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the application. Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 4 October 2018.   Liv Tigerstedt   Alena Poláčková   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX   No. First name LAST NAME Birth year Nationality Place of residence     Zareta Davidovna DZHANAYEVA   1957 Russian Vladikavkaz   Alik Davidovich DZHANAYEV   1948 Russian Tsmi   Elbrus Davidovich DZHANAYEV   1939 Russian Tsmi   Aza Davidovna DZHANAYEVA   1950 Russian Tsmi   Marianna Elbrusovna DZHANAYEVA   1970 Russian Tsmi   Boris Stanislavovich SHANAYEV   1994 Russian Tsmi   Regina Stanislavovna SHANAYEVA 1991 Russian Tsmi