BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, 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!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Bekir MUSTAFOVSKI v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia - 50111/07 [2010] ECHR 2174 (14 December 2010) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/2174.html Cite as: [2010] ECHR 2174 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
50111/07
by Bekir MUSTAFOVSKI
against the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 14 December 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Rait Maruste, President,
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 3 November 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Bekir Mustafovski, a Macedonian national who was born in 1957 and lives in Resen. The Macedonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs R. Lazareska Gerovska.
The case concerned the length of civil proceedings in which the applicant claimed payment of a debt. The proceedings began on 13 April 1998 and ended on 4 May 2007 (date of service).
On 1 December 2008 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaint about the length of the impugned proceedings under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention.
On 12 March 2009 the Court received a friendly settlement declaration signed by the Government. On 15 April 2009 the applicant was invited to submit his position concerning the friendly settlement of the case before 30 April 2009. However, the Court notes that the applicant has failed to do so. Moreover, he failed to respond to two registered letters dated 9 September 2009 and 22 April 2010 respectively, the latter including a warning of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his 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 Rait Maruste
Deputy Registrar President
