European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Galina Aleksandrovna GORODNOVA v Russia - 26588/07 [2010] ECHR 1765 (14 October 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/1765.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 1765
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
26588/07
by Galina Aleksandrovna GORODNOVA
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 14 October 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Nina
Vajić,
President,
Dean
Spielmann,
Giorgio
Malinverni,
judges,
and
André Wampach, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 May 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Ms Galina Aleksandrovna Gorodnova, a Russian national who was born in 1930 and lived in Ozersk of the Chelyabinsk Region. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 6 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the Convention of lengthy non-enforcement of a court judgment in favour of her deceased husband.
On 25 April 2008 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant's complaints detailed above.
On 19 April 2010 the Government informed the Registry that the applicant had died on 31 May 2007. They also submitted that considering that the applicant herself had not been a party to the court proceedings which resulted in the relevant judgment and that nobody had expressed an interest in pursuing the application, a search for legal successors would be excessive. Accordingly, they requested that the Court strike the application out of its list of cases.
On 23 April 2010 the Court forwarded the Government's submissions to the applicant's former address requesting to indicate by 28 May 2010 a person wishing to pursue the proceedings in the applicant's stead. To date, it has not received any reply.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicant does not have any heirs wishing to pursue the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 of the Convention.
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.
André Wampach Nina
Vajić
Deputy Registrar President
