European Court of Human Rights

FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 31925/06
Galina Nikolayevna LALO
against Ukraine

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 4 January 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,
Ann Power-Forde,
Angelika Nußberger, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 25 July 2006,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Ms Galina Nikolayevna Lalo, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1941 and lives in Simferopol.

The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Valeria Lutkovska.

The applicant complained, in particular, about the examination of her civil case by the appellate court in her absence.

This complaint was communicated to the Government. The applicant, in turn, was invited to appoint a legal representative in the proceedings before the Court. The Registry’s requests to her in that regard of 24 March and 23 June 2011 remained without reply.

By a letter dated 6 September 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was requested to inform the Registry, within two weeks, whether she wished to maintain her application and, if so, to comply with the aforementioned requests. Her 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. As confirmed by the applicant’s signature on the post receipt, she received this letter on 21 September 2011, but has not responded to date.

THE LAW

The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her application, 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 case.

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.

Stephen Phillips Boštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy Registrar President