FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 27060/03 b y Aleksey FILIN against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights ( First Section), sitting on 6 May 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

Christos Rozakis , President, Nina Vajić , Anatoly Kovler , Elisabeth Steiner , Khanlar Hajiyev , Giorgio Malinverni , George Nicolaou , judges, and Søren Nielsen , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 July 2003 ,

Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Aleksey Vyacheslavovich Filin , is a Russian national who was born in 1968 and lives in Ryazan . The respondent Government are represented by Mrs V. Milinchuk , Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties , may be summarised as follows.

The applicant is a military serviceman.

On 6 March 2002 the Military Court of the Ryazan Garrison granted the applicant ’ s claim against military unit no. 41450 for unpaid emoluments and awarded him 137,828 Russian roubles. According to the Government, the amount due was paid to the applicant on 15 September 2003.

On 29 November 2004 the same court awarded the applicant compensation for inflation losses caused by the delay in the enforcement proceedings. The compensation was paid to him on 28 December 2004.

The Government submitted the applicant ’ s letter of 18 May 2007, in which he asked the Court to discontinue the proceedings on his application.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 about non-enforcement of the judgment of 6 March 2002 .

THE LAW

The Court recalls Article 37 of the Convention which, in the relevant part, reads as follows:

“1. The Court may at any stage of the proceedings decide to strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that

(a) the applicant does not intend to pursue his application;

...

However, the Court shall continue the examination of the application if respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto so requires.”

The Court observes that the Government produced the applicant letter stating his intention not to pursue his application. Given that the request was produced by the Government instead of being submitted by the applicant directly to the Court, on 18 June 2007 the applicant was requested to submit his comments by 17 August 2007 . No response was received from the applicant.

By letter s of 12 September 2007 and 11 February 2008 sent by registered mail , the applicant was advised that the period allowed for submission of his comments had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. His attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court would 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 applicant received the latter letter on 27 February 2008 but never replied.

The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be considered as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. The Court further notes that the amounts due to him have already been paid. It therefore considers that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require it to continue the examination of his complaints ( Article 37 § 1 in fine ). In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to s trike the case out of the list of cases.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the applic ation out of its list of cases.

Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis Registrar President