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 >> Dimitar Dimitrov DIMITROV v Bulgaria - 23342/06 [2011] ECHR 351 (31 January 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/351.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 351 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
23342/06
by Dimitar Dimitrov DIMITROV
against Bulgaria
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 31 January 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Mirjana
Lazarova Trajkovska,
President,
Karel
Jungwiert,
Zdravka
Kalaydjieva,
judges,
and Stephen Phillips,
Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 23 March 2006,
Having regard to the partial decision of 15 September 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Dimitar Dimitrov Dimitrov, a Bulgarian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Sofia. The Bulgarian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs M. Kotseva, of the Ministry of Justice.
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention in Pleven Prison.
The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention was communicated to the Government on 15 September 2009, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. On 22 January 2010 the observations were forwarded to the applicant who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 5 November 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 4 March 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s 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 letter was returned on 3 December 2010 as “unclaimed”.
No further correspondence has been received from the applicant whose last communication to the Court dates back to 2 November 2006.
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 Mirjana Lazarova
Trajkovska
Deputy Registrar President