CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 7 novembre 2024

.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 } .sC986E16F { font-family:Arial; color:#ffffff } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sE55E11EC { width:137.42pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; 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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB9541D82 { font-family:Arial; color:#212121 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 13116/21 Pavlo Petrovych UMANETS against Ukraine and 5 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 7   November 2024 as a Committee composed of:   Diana Sârcu , President ,   Kateřina Šimáčková,   Mykola Gnatovskyy , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, 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 the Convention were communicated to the Ukrainian 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 (see the appended table for the relevant dates). No reply was received by the Court. By letters dated 15 March and 24 June 2024, sent through the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (eComms) and by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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. No reply followed. THE LAW Having regard to the similar procedural conduct of the applicant party, the Court finds it appropriate to examine the applications 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 28 November 2024.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Sârcu   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications No. Application no. Introduction date Applicant Year of Birth Representative’s name   Complaints communicated Date of sending Government’s observations to the applicant Date of the Court strike-out warning letter - Date of receipt 1. 13116/21 19/02/2021 Pavlo Petrovych UMANETS 1985   Art. 6 § 1 - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 15/05/2023 (by eComms)   15/03/2024 (by registered post) - received on 08/05/2024 2. 1774/22 20/12/2021 Andriy Gulmuradovych MIRZEKHANOV 1966 Tamara Mykolayivna VORONENKO Art. 6 § 1 - lack of fairness of the proceedings - failure to notify the applicant of the other party’s submissions. 15/05/2023 (by eComms)   15/03/2024 (by registered post) and 24/06/2024 (by registered post) - received on 16/07/2024 3. 38093/22 19/07/2022 Renat Restamovych PRYADUN 1983   Art. 6 § 1 - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings 06/06/2023 (by eComms) 04/09/2023 (by eComms) - downloaded on 04/06/2024 4. 53783/22 26/10/2022 Volodymyr Stepanovych ZHEREBETSKYY 1988 Yaromyr Volodymyrovych TSIMURA Art. 6 § 1 - lack of impartiality of the tribunal in view of the absence of the prosecuting party in administrative-offence proceedings. 19/07/2023 (by eComms)   24/06/2024 (by registered post) - received on 11/07/2024 5. 4168/23 30/12/2022 Yuriy Mykolayovych RADIN 1978   Art. 5 § 1 – right to liberty/deprivation of liberty - no legal basis for arrest without a prior court decision. 20/09/2023 (by eComms)   15/03/2024 (by registered post) - received on 17/05/2024 6. 11541/23 10/02/2023 Stanislav Valeriyovych BALUTA 1990   Art. 5 § 3 – excessive length of pre-trial detention. 17/10/2023 (by eComms)   15/03/2024 (by registered post) - returned to the Court on 06/06/2024 as unclaimed