FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 24373/03 by Vladimir SAVITSKIY against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 1 April 2008 as a Chamber composed of:

Christos Rozakis , President, Nina Vajić , Anatoly Kovler , Elisabeth Steiner , Khanlar Hajiyev , Dean Spielmann ,

Giorgio Malinverni , judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 June 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 Vladimir Anatolyevich Savitskiy, a Russian national , was born in 1945 and died in 2006 . The Russian Government (“the Government”) were initially represented by Mr P. Laptev, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by Mrs V. Milinchuk.

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

By judgment of 7 June 2001, the Yurga Town Court of the Kemerovo Region awarded the applicant 41,100.44 Russian roubles (RUB) against the local Social Security Committee. On 23 November 2001 the Presidium of the Kemerovo Regional Court quashed that judgment of 7 June 2001 by way of supervisory review and remitted the case for a re-examination.

By judgment of 4 December 2003, the Town Court awarded the applicant RUB 96,595.52 and monthly payments of RUB 4,923.50. On 4 February 2004 the Regional Court upheld the judgment. It appears that the applicant received the money in November 2005.

In separate proceedings, on 8 August 2005 the Town Court awarded the RUB 18,482.31. On 6 September 2005 the Town Court awarded the applicant RUB 17,387.19. It appears that both judgments were enforced in December 2006.

COMPLAINTS

1. The applicant complain ed under Article 6 § 1 of the Conve n tion about the violation of his right to a trial within reasonable time and that he had not had a fair trial, in particular because of the quashing of the final judgment of 7 June 2001 by way of supervisory review.

2. The applicant complained about the delay in enforcement of the judgments of 4 December 2003, 8 August and 6 September 2005.

T HE LAW

On 20 February 2007 the Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and the merits of the case. They also informed the Court that the applicant had died on 30 August 2006.

By letter dated 15 March 2007 , sent by registered post, the Government ’ s observations were sent to the applicant ’ s home address. His eventual heirs were invited to state by 26 April 2007 whether or not they intended to pursue the proceedings before the Court. Their 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. It appears that the Court ’ s letter was delivered in late March 2007. No reply followed.

The Court considers with reference to Article 37 § 1 (a) and (c ) of the Convention that, in these circumstances, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application . 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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 and 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.

André Wampach Christos Rozakis              Deputy Registrar President