European Court of Human Rights
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Mehmed Mehmed IBISH v Bulgaria - 29893/06 [2011] ECHR 347 (31 January 2011)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/347.html
Cite as: [2011] ECHR 347
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
29893/06
by Mehmed Mehmed IBISH
against Bulgaria
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 31 January 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
President,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
Julia
Laffranque,
judges,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 July 2004,
Having regard to the correspondence with the parties,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
The application was lodged by Mr Mehmed Mehmed Ibish, a Bulgarian national who was born in 1948 and lived in Pavel Bania. He was represented before the Court by Mr S. Stoyanov, a lawyer practising in Stara Zagora.
The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms R. Nikolova, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained that a private person who had assaulted his late wife had not been effectively prosecuted and punished due to the inactivity of the investigating authorities and the courts, and that, as a result of the discontinuance of the criminal proceedings against that person he had been deprived of effective access to a court.
After notice of the application was given to the Government, by a letter dated 29 September 2009 and sent by registered post, their observations were transmitted to the applicant, who was requested to submit, by 24 November 2009, observations in reply, together with any claims for just satisfaction. In a letter dated 10 November 2009 the applicant stated that he was unable to meet the costs of his legal representation. By a letter dated 11 June 2010, sent by registered post to both the applicant’s legal representative and the applicant himself, the applicant was informed of the possibility to apply for legal aid, and was granted an extension until 15 September 2010 to submit his observations and claims for just satisfaction. The applicant and his legal representative both received copies of that letter on 21 June 2010. As neither of them replied, by further letter, dated 15 October 2010 and sent by registered post again to both the applicant’s legal representative and the applicant himself, the applicant’s attention was drawn to the fact that the time limit for submitting observations and claims had expired, and that no extension of time had been requested. He was reminded that, under Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court may strike a case out of its list where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant’s legal representative received that letter on 25 October 2010; he has not replied to it. On 2 November 2010 the copy of the letter addressed to the applicant himself came back at the Court with a note by the Bulgarian Post Office that the applicant had died. No heirs or close relatives have come forward to pursue the application on his behalf.
THE LAW
It has been the Court’s practice to strike applications out of the list of cases under Article 37 § 1 of the Convention in the absence of any heir or close relative who has expressed the wish to pursue an application (see Léger v. France (striking out) [GC], no. 19324/02, § 44, ECHR 2009 ..., with further references). From the developments set out above it appears that the applicant died in the course of the proceedings. No heirs or close relatives have expressed the wish to pursue the application on his behalf. As the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights which require the continued examination of the case (contrast Karner v. Austria, no. 40016/98, §§ 24 28, ECHR 2003 IX), it considers it appropriate to strike the application out of its list of cases under Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Stephen Phillips Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska
Deputy
Registrar President