European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Huseyin GOKCEARSLAN v Turkey - 5451/05 [2010] ECHR 1936 (9 November 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/1936.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 1936
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
5451/05
by Hüseyin GÖKÇEARSLAN
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 9 November 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Françoise Tulkens,
President,
Ireneu Cabral Barreto,
Işıl
Karakaş, judges,
and Françoise
Elens-Passos, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 31 January 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Hüseyin Gökçearslan, a Turkish national who was born in 1944 and lives in Ankara. He was represented before the Court by Mr Ünsal Özdoğan, a lawyer practising in Ankara. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr H. Ulusoy, Deputy Permanent Representative.
The applicant complained under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention about the excessive length of domestic proceedings and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the violation of his right to peaceful enjoyment of property. On 21 October 2009 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints detailed above.
On 12 April 2010 the Government submitted to the Registry their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. These were forwarded on 20 April 2010 to the applicant, who was invited to submit observations in reply. On 27 May 2010 the applicant submitted his observations accompanied by a proposal for friendly settlement. However, on 31 May 2010 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application, submitting a letter from the applicant which gave him authorisation to do so.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of 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.
Françoise Elens-Passos Françoise
Tulkens
Deputy
Registrar President
