 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Dmitriy Vladimirovich ZAYCHENKO v Ukraine - 7957/05 [2010] ECHR 2163 (30 November 2010) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/2163.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 2163 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
7957/05
by Dmitriy Vladimirovich ZAYCHENKO
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 30 November 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Rait
Maruste,
President,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 February 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Dmitriy Vladimirovich Zaychenko, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1970 and lives in Odesa, Ukraine. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev.
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 about the unlawfulness of his arrest. He further complained under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention about unfairness of his criminal trial on account of the manner in which the courts took evidence against him and about failure to be provided with the opportunity to hear an audio-recording of the hearings. The applicant further raised other complaints under Articles 7, 13 and 14 of the Convention and Article 2 of Protocol No. 7.
The applicant’s complaints concerning unfairness of the manner in which the courts took evidence against him were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. The last correspondence from the applicant was received on 26 November 2008.
By letter dated 29 July 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 9 June 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. This letter was returned to the Court as not claimed.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of 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 its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Stephen Phillips Rait Maruste
Deputy Registrar President
