CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 7 mars 2019

.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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s959B95E9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .sD407E162 { width:116.42pt; display:inline-block } .s1551CE58 { width:34.45pt; display:inline-block } .sC5E64922 { width:104.08pt; display:inline-block }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 31656/17 Aleksandr BORODULIN against Estonia   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 7   March 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,   Arnfinn Bårdsen,   Darian Pavli, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 April 2017, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Borodulin, was born in 1984. He was represented before the Court by Mr S. Reinsaar, a lawyer practising in Tallinn. The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning his right to protection of his physical integrity in prison was communicated to the Estonian Government (“the Government”). By letter dated 6 December 2018, sent by e-transmission, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations on the admissibility and merits of the application had expired on 26   November 2018 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s 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. On 16   December 2018 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant had been released from detention and that he had lost contact with the applicant. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicant 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 28 March 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström   Acting Deputy Registrar   President