THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 54571/10 Yuriy Appolonovich MALYSHEV against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 15 November 2016 as a Committee composed of:

Branko Lubarda, President, Pere Pastor Vilanova, Georgios A. Serghides, judges,

and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 September 2010,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Yuriy Appolonovich Malyshev, was a Russian national, who was born in 1966 and was detained in the Vologda Region.

The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.

The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention about a deprivation of the parental authority, and under Article 6 about his inability to attend civil proceedings in that case.

The applicant ’ s complaints under Articles 6 and 8 of the Convention were communicated to the Government.

On 29 February 2016 the Government informed the Court that the applicant had died on 23 October 2015 and that no information about the legal succession in his regard had been received.

By letters dated 7 March and 7 July 2016, sent by registered post to the applicant ’ s home address, the Court requested the applicant ’ s heirs or close family members to manifest themselves. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

The Court notes that the applicant has deceased and that no relatives or heirs have presented themselves. It has been the Court ’ s practice to strike applications out of the list of cases in the absence of any heir or close relative who has expressed the wish to pursue an application (see Léger v. France (striking out) [GC], no. 19324/02, § 44, 30 March 2009, with further references). Furthermore, the Court does not consider that the present case involved an important question of general interest transcending the person and the interests of the individual applicant.

Accordingly, the Court concludes that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 of the Convention.

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.

Done in English and notified in writing on 8 December 2016 .

FatoÅŸ Aracı Branko Lubarda              Deputy Registrar President