FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 44851/09 O.K. against Georgia

The European Court of Human Rights ( Fourth Section ), sitting on 21 April 2015 as a Committee composed of:

Päivi Hirvelä, President, Ledi Bianku, Nona Tsotsoria, judges,

and Fatoş Aracı , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 August 2009 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. The applicant, Ms O.K. , is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1974 and lives in Birkirkara, Malta . The President granted the applicant ’ s request for her identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 4).

2. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Meskhoradze , of the Ministry of Justice .

3. On 20 March 2014 the applicant ’ s complaint under Article 8 of the Convention concerning a child custody dispute was communicated to the Government.

4. By a letter of 28 August 2014, the Court requested the applicant to submit her observations on the admissibility and merits of the case in reply to those of the Government by 9 October 2014 at the latest. The applicant failed to reply.

5. By a letter dated 22 December 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired 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 applicant duly received this letter on 9 January 2015 . Howeve r, no response has followed.

THE LAW

6. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.

7. 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 21 May 2015 .

Fatoş Aracı Päivi Hirvelä Deputy Registrar President