CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 29 juin 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sF9195E13 { margin-top:24pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .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 } THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 46563/15 Svetlomir Nikolov NESHKOV against Bulgaria The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 29 June 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli , President ,   Ioannis Ktistakis,   Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 September 2015, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Svetlomir Nikolov Neshkov, was born in 1971. He was represented by Ms S. Ivanova, a lawyer practising in Sofia. On 25 August 2022 the Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applicant’s complaint, falling to be examined under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and possibly in part also under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention, concerning a refusal of the Pleven Administrative Court to examine his claim relating to work in Belene Prison. The Government’s written observations on the admissibility and merits of that complaint were received at the Court on 20 March 2023 and were forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer the following day, 21 March 2023, via the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (“eComms”). The applicant’s lawyer was also invited to submit by 2 May 2023 written observations in reply on behalf of the applicant, together with any claim for just satisfaction. The applicant’s lawyer downloaded the Government’s observations from eComms on 23 March 2023, along with some, but not all, of their annexes. She did not file observations or a claim for just satisfaction on behalf of the applicant within the time-limit fixed for that purpose: 2 May 2023. Nor did she seek an extension of that time-limit. In a letter dated 23 May 2023 and sent to the applicant’s lawyer via eComms the same day, she was warned that the time-limit for submission of the applicant’s written observations and of any claim for just satisfaction had expired and that no extension of time has been requested; her attention was also drawn to the terms of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. The applicant’s lawyer downloaded that letter from eComms on 14 June 2023, but has not replied to it. THE LAW In the light of the above developments, and of the terms of Rule 37 § 1 of the Rules of Court, according to which “communications or notifications addressed to the ... advocates of the parties shall be deemed to have been addressed to the parties”, and of paragraph 1 of the Practice Direction on Electronic Filing by Applicants, according to which “after the communication of a case, applicants who have opted to file pleadings electronically ... shall accept written communications sent to them by the Registry of the Court by means of eComms”, the applicant may be regarded as no longer intending to pursue the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. There are, furthermore, 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 (Article 37 § 1 in fine ). The application should therefore be struck out of the Court’s list of cases. 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 20 July 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Darian Pavli   Acting Deputy Registrar   President