CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 19 décembre 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 } .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 } .s46DB5BA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s2F3EB0E4 { border:0.75pt solid #838383; 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 } .sE1A7A04C { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#424242 } .sBAADFE8C { border:0.75pt solid #838383; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 81481/17 Kostyantyn Valentynovych TSYRKUN against Ukraine and 2 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 19   December 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 applicants were required to submit their observations in reply, however, the contact with the applicants has been lost (see appended table for details). By letters 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 (see appended table for dates and details). 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 applicants, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. 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 applications. Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 23 January 2025.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Diana Sârcu   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX List of applications No. Application no. Introduction date Applicant Year of Birth Representative’s name   Main complaints raised Date of sending Government’s observations to the applicant Date of the Court strike-out warning letter 1. 81481/17 20/11/2017 Kostyantyn Valentynovych TSYRKUN 1962 Nazar Stepanovych KULCHYTSKYY Art. 5 (1) (c) - unlawful pre-trial detention,   Art. 8 (1) - the search of the applicant’s home without a court warrant, allegedly in breach of the domestic law.   21/11/2023 (by eComms)   22/02/2024 (by eComms, not downloaded)   17/05/2024 (by registered post)   30/09/2024 (by registered post, returned undelivered)   2. 33023/22 22/06/2022 Oleksandr Stepanovych LEVKIVSKYY 1977   Art. 6 (1) - excessive length of criminal proceedings;   Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of excessive length of criminal proceedings.   24/05/2023 (by eComms)   04/09/2023 (by eComms, not downloaded)   12/04/2024 (by registered post, received by Kyiv Pre-trial Detention Facility on 18/06/2024)   3. 56536/22 17/11/2022 Vitaliy Volodymyrovych KOZHAN 1968   Art. 6 (1) - unfairness of civil proceedings due to failure to inform the applicant of another party’s submissions or a hearing   15/08/2023 (by eComms)   09/07/2024 (by eComms, not downloaded)   19/09/2024 (by registered post, returned undelivered)