European Court of Human Rights

THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 23973/05
Pavel FILIP against Romania
and 2 other applications
(see list appended)

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on
29 May 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Egbert Myjer, President,
Luis López Guerra,
Kristina Pardalos, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on 14 June 2005, 22 August 2005 and 22 August 2005, respectively,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.

The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms I. Cambrea, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning the divergent case-law of the domestic courts on the interpretation of the Decree-Law no. 118/1990 awarding benefits to politically persecuted persons during the communist regime 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 letters.

By letters dated 29 November 2011, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 27 May 2011 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. No response has been received.

THE LAW

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.

Marialena Tsirli Egbert Myjer
Deputy Registrar President