THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 59042/10 Constantin NEAGU against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 23 September 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Alvina Gyulumyan , President, Johannes Silvis , Valeriu Griţco , judges, and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 September 2010 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Constantin Neagu , is a Romanian national, who was born in 1971 and lives in Bucharest .

The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar , of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs .

The applicant ’ s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the conditions of his detention in Giurgiu Prison was communicated to the Government on 8 November 2013. The Government ’ s observations on the admissibility and merits were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. The applicant, who was released from prison in January 2013, did n o t reply to the Registry ’ s letter .

By letter dated 12 May 2014 , sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 16 April 2014 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. However, no response has been received from the applicant and t h e letter was returned to the Court as unclaimed mail.

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.

Marialena Tsirli Alvina Gyulumyan              Deputy Registrar President