CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 9 juillet 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; 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 } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sD407E162 { width:116.42pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .s48941B3D { width:6.33pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 18109/16 Remus-Mugurel BOGDAN against Romania and 4 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 9   July   2020 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,   Georges Ravarani,   Jolien Schukking, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government. By letters sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the time allowed for the submission of their observations or of certain requested information had expired (see the appended table for the relevant dates). The applicants’ attention was further 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. No reply to these letters has been received by the Court (see details in the appended table) and there are no previous letters from the applicants informing the Court about a change of address. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the applications (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 applications. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 30 July 2020.   Liv Tigerstedt   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention) No. Application no. Date of introduction Applicant’s name Date of birth   Representative’s name and location Date of the Court’s registered letter Date of receipt of the registered letter Time-limit for submission by the applicant of the information requested Date of the applicant’s release from prison       18109/16 22/04/2016 Remus-Mugurel BOGDAN 03/12/1988     21/11/2019 27/11/2019 Signed by the applicant 06/01/2020 07/11/2017       23357/16 12/05/2016 Ioan FILIP 23/04/1980     21/11/2019 29/11/2019 Signed by the applicant 06/01/2020 15/12/2017       24532/16 21/06/2016 Costel-Narcis ARGEȘANU 02/06/1972     21/11/2019 29/11/2019 Signed by the applicant 06/01/2020 23/01/2018       27894/16 30/06/2016 Ionuţ OLESCU 26/09/1987 Roxana Georgeta Olescu Teliu 21/11/2019 29/11/2019 Signed by the applicant’s wife who is also his representative 06/01/2020 Still in detention       29297/16 27/06/2016 Constantin DIN 07/11/1987     21/11/2019 29/11/2019 Signed by the applicant 06/01/2020 23/10/2018