CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 25 septembre 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 } .sF2EF8B01 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s761D06F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s88036C24 { width:29.79pt; display:inline-block } .sCC1D0E8B { width:154.77pt; display:inline-block } .sAFF36EC2 { width:18.78pt; display:inline-block } .s1B61D60 { width:156.43pt; display:inline-block } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION This version was rectified on 26 October 2018 under Rule 81 of the Rules of Court Application no. 67122/09 MAXBET ENTERTAINMENT GROUP PLC and MAKSBET TOV against Ukraine   The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 25   September 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Yonko Grozev, President,   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer,   Lәtif Hüseynov, judges, and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 December 2009, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The first applicant, Maxbet Entertainment Group PLC, is a Cypriot company and the second applicant, Maxbet TOV, is a Ukrainian company. They have their officers in Limassol and Kyiv respectively. They were represented before the Court by Mr K. Klyatskyy, residing in Kyiv. The applicants’ complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No.   1 were communicated to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”), who were represented by Ms O. Dadydchuk, Head of the Office of the Government Agent before the European Court of Human Rights. [1] The applicant companies failed to respond to the last Registry’s letter of 7 June 2018 (this letter was received by their representative on 18 June 2018 and a copy of the letter sent to the first applicant company’s corporate address was returned to the Court as unclaimed on 3 August 2018), reminding them that the period allowed for submission of their observations in reply to the observations sent by the Government had expired on 25 April 2018 and that no extension of time had been requested. Their attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant companies may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their 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 18 October 2018.   Milan Blaško   Yonko Grozev   Deputy Registrar   President     [1] Rectified on 26 October 2018: the text was: “(…) their Agent, most recently Mr   I.   Lishchyna”