CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 28 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 } .s9EADC58A { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; 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 } .sD7AA71C8 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sBBFD69C3 { width:114.42pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 73188/14 Agavali Surkhay oglu HASANOV against Azerbaijan   The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 28   November 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, President,   Mārtiņš Mits,   Lәtif Hüseynov, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 7   November 2014, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Agavali Surkhay oglu Hasanov, was born in 1939. The applicant was represented by Mr Y. Agazade, a lawyer practising in Azerbaijan. The applicant’s complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and Articles   6 and 13 of the Convention, concerning the allegedly unlawful modifications by the authorities to his property and the alleged unfairness of the domestic proceedings, were communicated to the Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letters of 22 October 2018 and 5 June 2019, sent by registered post, the applicant’s lawyer was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations   had expired on 2 August 2018 and that no extension of time had been requested. The lawyer’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. The Registry received no confirmation of receipt by the applicant’s lawyer of the first letter. However, the applicant’s lawyer received the second letter on 28 June 2019. On 3 July 2019 the applicant’s lawyer informed the Court that he had not received the Government’s observations and was therefore unable to submit the applicant’s observations. In response, by letter of 18 July 2019 the Government’s observations were again forwarded to him and a new period for submission of the applicant’s observations was allowed. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter of 18 July 2019. By letter of 3 September 2019, sent through the Court’s Electronic Communications Service (eComms), the applicant’s lawyer was notified that the new period allowed for submission of the applicant’s observations   had expired on 22 August 2019 and that no extension of time had been requested. The lawyer’s attention was again drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. The applicant’s lawyer received the letter on 3 September 2019. However, no response has been received. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicant does not wish to pursue the 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 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 19 December 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer   Acting Deputy Registrar   President