SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 447/12 Ain RANDMAA against Estonia

The European Court of Human Rights ( Second Section ), sitting on 9 February 2016 as a Committee composed of:

Paul Lemmens , President, Ksenija Turković , Jon Fridrik Kjølbro , judges,

and Abel Campos , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 19 December 2011 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Ain Randmaa , is an Estonian national, who was born in 1970 and lives in J õ geva . He was represented before the Court by Mr T. Pilv , a lawyer practising in Tartu .

The Estonian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Kuurberg , of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .

The applicant ’ s complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant ’ s representative , who was invited to submit observations on behalf of the applicant . No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter dated 17 December 2015 , sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 1 December 2015 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant ’ s representative ’ 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 applicant ’ s representative received this letter on 29 December 2015 . However, no response has been received.

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.

Done in English and notified in writing on 3 March 2016 .

Abel Campos Paul Lemmens              Deputy Registrar President