European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Valentina Georgiyevna GEDICH v Russia - 44966/04 [2009] ECHR 2097 (26 November 2009)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2009/2097.html
Cite as: [2009] ECHR 2097
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
44966/04
by Valentina Georgiyevna GEDICH
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 26 November 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina
Vajić,
Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth
Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Giorgio
Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and Søren
Nielsen, Section
Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 November 2004,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Ms Valentina Georgiyevna Gedich, a Russian national who was born in 1940 and lives in Irkutsk. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were initially represented by Ms V. Milinchuk, former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their Representative, Mr G. Matyushkin.
The applicant’s complaint under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the length of the civil proceedings to which she had been a party was 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 her own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 13 February 2009, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 9 December 2008 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. No response followed.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.
Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis
Registrar President