CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 novembre 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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s6F88BEDC { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:3pt; font-size:1pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sE330DFD7 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:3pt } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8B7697D0 { width:20.77pt; display:inline-block } .sB0BEFF64 { width:123.41pt; display:inline-block } .sF7DC134C { width:39.46pt; display:inline-block } .s44B8752F { width:177.11pt; display:inline-block }     THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 20319/15 George PACE against Malta   The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19   November 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Georgios A. Serghides, President,   Erik Wennerström,   Lorraine Schembri Orland, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 April 2015, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr George Pace, is a Maltese national, who was born in   1951 and is detained in Paola, Malta. He was represented before the Court by Dr M. Camilleri, a lawyer practising in Valletta. The applicant’s complaint - that he had not had a fair trial because he was not permitted to consult a lawyer prior to making statements which were used against him in criminal proceedings - was communicated to the Maltese Government (“the Government”), who were represented by their Agent, Dr.   P. Grech, Attorney General, on 20 December 2018. The Government made submissions which were received by the Court on 11   April 2019. By a letter of 26 April 2019 the applicant’s representative was invited to submit by 7 June 2019 at the latest any written observations she might wish to make in reply on behalf of the applicant, together with claims for just satisfaction. The applicant’s legal representative failed to reply. This correspondence returned to the Court - it having remained unclaimed - on 2 July 2019. In the meantime, by a registered letter of 25 June 2019 the applicant’s legal representative was informed that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations on the admissibility and merits of the application had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. Her attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. She was further informed that should there be reasons to explain that the submissions on her client’s behalf were outstanding, she should inform the Registrar accordingly, not later than 23   July 2019, and submit such submissions within the same time-limit. This correspondence returned to the Court - it having remained unclaimed - on 9   August 2019. According to the records of the postal services, an attempt to deliver the correspondence was made on 3 July 2019, however, the addressee could not be reached. A notification was left informing the recipient that the item could be picked up at the post office. The recipient having failed to collect the correspondence by 17 July 2019, it was returned to the sender. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his 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 12 December 2019.   Stephen Phillips   Georgios A. Serghides   Registrar   President