CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 8 décembre 2022

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s3E4E4D31 { width:79.06%; margin-left:42.3pt; border-collapse:collapse } .s23692999 { width:9.82%; 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 } .s18F4060B { width:29.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sFFEC9C89 { width:36.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s88ABD027 { width:24.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9C4A810B { width:9.82%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8D9DBD4A { width:29.12%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s3FA95F6 { width:36.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s91B8069D { width:24.42%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 42573/20 A.L. and M.L. against Greece (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 8   December 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli , President ,   Ioannis Ktistakis,   Andreas Zünd , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 28   September 2020, Having regard to the interim measure indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, Having regard to the decision to grant the applicants   anonymity, in accordance with Rule 47 § 4 of the Rules of the Court, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants were represented by Ms I. Metton, a lawyer practising in Paris. On 29 September 2020 the Court acceded to the applicants’ request to apply Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and indicated that the Government should guarantee to the applicants living conditions compatible with Article 3 of the Convention, having regard to their state of health, and should provide them with adequate healthcare compatible with their state of health. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3, and/or Article 8 and Article   13 of the Convention concerning their living conditions and medical treatment in RIC Samos, as well as about the lack of any effective remedy in domestic law, were communicated to the Greek Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 5 July 2022, sent to the applicants’ representative via the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (eComms), they were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations   had expired on 28 April 2022 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant party’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 applicants’ lawyer received that letter on 5 July 2022. However, a reply has not been received. 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 the application. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list. It is therefore also appropriate 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 12 January 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Darian Pavli   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applicants No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality 1. A. L. 1976 Syrian 2. M. L. 2008 Syrian