If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?
Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Viktor Vasilyevich TOLKACHEV v Ukraine - 22899/04 [2010] ECHR 531 (16 March 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/531.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 531
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
22899/04
by Viktor Vasilyevich TOLKACHEV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16 March 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer
Lorenzen,
President,
Renate
Jaeger,
Karel
Jungwiert,
Isabelle
Berro-Lefèvre,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
judges,
Mykhaylo
Buromenskiy, ad
hoc judge,
and
Claudia Westerdiek, Section
Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 April 2004,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Viktor Vasilyevich Tolkachev, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1953 and lives in Dobropolye. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev. The applicant complained under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about non-enforcement of a court judgment in his favour.
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the case on 21 July 2008. By letters of 11 August and 16 December 2008 the applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply together with any claims for just satisfaction by 22 September 2008 and 27 January 2009, respectively. However, the applicant failed to do so. Moreover, he failed to respond to a registered letter dated 18 March 2009 warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
THE LAW
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 application.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Claudia Westerdiek Peer Lorenzen
Registrar President