CEDHCASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG28
CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 24 mars 2022
- ECLI
- ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0324DEC002261521
- Date
- 24 mars 2022
- Publication
- 24 mars 2022
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulRésumé structuré
version préliminaireFaits
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Procédure
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Question juridique
Non déterminable à partir du texte fourni.
Solution
source officielleStruck out of the list
Résumé généré automatiquement — à vérifier avec la décision originale.
Analyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .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 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s22DFA96B { width:28.86pt; display:inline-block } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC5599237 { width:142.72pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s376CDD9C { width:117.08pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 22615/21 A.O.J. against the Netherlands The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24   March 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Armen Harutyunyan, President,   Jolien Schukking,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 3   May 2021, Having regard to the decision to grant the applicant anonymity, in accordance with Rule 47 § 4 of the Rules of the Court, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr A.O.J., is a Sudanese national, who was born in 2000 and lives in Heemersveen, the Netherlands. He was represented by Mr   N.   Vollebergh, a lawyer practising in Breda. The applicant complained that his transfer from the Netherlands to Malta under Regulation (EU) No. 604/2013 (“the Dublin Regulation”) would be in breach of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions in reception, accommodation and/or detention facilities in Malta. On 30 June 2021 the Court (duty judge) decided that, in the absence of confirmation from the Maltese authorities that once transferred the applicant would be treated in a manner that protected his Article 3 rights, it was in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it to indicate to the Government of the Netherlands (“the Dutch Government”) under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, that he should not be removed to Malta. On 8 July 2021 the Court decided to give notice to the Dutch Government of the applicant’s complaint. On 10 February 2022 the Dutch Government informed the Registry that they would consider the applicant’s request for international protection in the Dutch asylum procedure and that he would therefore not be transferred to Malta. On 15 February 2022 the applicant informed the Registry that, in view of this development, he did not wish to maintain the application to the Court. 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, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list and to discontinue the application of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. 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 14 April 2022.   {signature_p_1}   {signature_p_2}   Viktoriya Maradudina   Armen Harutyunyan   Acting Deputy Registrar   PresidentCitations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG
- Formation
- 28
- Date
- 24 mars 2022
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CE:ECHR:2022:0324DEC002261521
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral