European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Emiliya Stanislavivna YASHCHYSHENA and Kateryna Leontiyivna YASHCHYSHENA, and Nikolay Khakshevich KOGAY v Ukraine - 5423/05 [2010] ECHR 537 (16 March 2010)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/537.html
Cite as: [2010] ECHR 537
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Applications nos.
5423/05 and 35789/05
by Emiliya Stanislavivna YASHCHYSHENA and
Kateryna Leontiyivna YASHCHYSHENA, and Nikolay Khakshevich
KOGAY
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,
Rait Maruste,
Mark Villiger,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
judges,
Mykhaylo Buromenskiy, ad hoc judge,
and
Claudia Westerdiek, Section
Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 January 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application no. 5423/05 was lodged by Ms Emiliya Stanislavivna Yashchyshena and Ms Kateryna Leontiyivna Yashchyshena who were born in 1958 and 1922 respectively and live in Kamyanets-Podilskyy, the Khmelnytsky region, Ukraine. On 3 January 2007 Ms K. Yashchyshena died and Mr Leonid Antonovych Yashchyshen, her heir, has expressed his wish to pursue her application before the Court. These applicants are represented by Mr I. Melnyk, a lawyer practising in Kamyanets-Podilsky, Ukraine.
The application no. 35789/05 was lodged by Mr Nikolay Khakshevich Kogay who was born in 1934 and lives in Tokmak, Zaporizhzhya region, Ukraine.
All the applicants are Ukrainian nationals.
The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Zaytsev.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 concerning the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgments given in their favour were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were, invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letters dated 21 September 2009, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of the their observations had expired on 4 August 2009 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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. The applicants received these letters on 28 and 29 September 2009. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in accordance with Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court, the applications should be joined, given their common factual and legal background. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their applications, 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 cases.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to join the applications;
Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Claudia Westerdiek Peer Lorenzen
Registrar President