CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 8 avril 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .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 } .s5FFF0A77 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; 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 } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s86D3EA10 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:7.1pt } .sFBE357B5 { width:96.41pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s863E5716 { width:138.53pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s6D47A865 { width:91.7%; margin-left:6.85pt; border-collapse:collapse } .s59A346EA { width:4.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sAE7FCEFB { width:42.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s7B815FD7 { width:28.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s495186E7 { width:24.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s8E97DE01 { width:4.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sBF02554 { width:42.3%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s39BAD798 { width:28.6%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s731A16AB { width:24.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 78138/13 Borys DANEVICH and Others against Ukraine   The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 8 April 2021 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,   Jovan Ilievski,   Mattias Guyomar, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 12   December 2013, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. On 12 December 2013 the applicants lodged a request for application of an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court in relation to their participation in mass protests in Kyiv at the time. In accordance with Rule   40 of the Rules of Court, on 13 December 2013 the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were informed of the request. On 17   December 2013 the Court refused to indicate to the Government the interim measure sought by the applicants. By letter dated 20 December 2013, sent by post and email, the applicants were notified of the decision of the Court and invited to inform the Court by 14 January 2014 if they wished to pursue their complaints. No reply was received from them since then. The applicants also did not submit an application form. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention and the Protocols thereto, the Court, in accordance with Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of this case. Accordingly, it 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 29 April 2021. Viktoriya Maradudina   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström Acting Deputy Registrar   President Appendix   List of the applicants   No. Applicant’s Name Nationality Place of residence 1. Borys DANEVICH Ukrainian Kyiv 2. Vyacheslav BONDAR Ukrainian Kyiv 3. Yuriy DEREVYANKO Ukrainian Kyiv 4. Viktor KALUZHSKYY Ukrainian Kyiv 5. Yuriy KARASHIVSKYY Ukrainian Kyiv 6. Tetyana ZHELYEZNA Ukrainian Kyiv