FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 79860/12 Przemys ł aw KRZEMIŃSKI against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 16 September 2014 as a Committee composed of:

George Nicolaou , President, Zdravka Kalaydjieva , Faris Vehabović , judges,

and Fatoş Aracı , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 November 2012,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Przemysław Krzemiński , is a Polish national, who was born in 1974 and lives in Krakow.

The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Justyna Chrzanowska , of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of detention with overcrowding.

The applicant ’ s complaints under Article 3 of the Convention were communicated to the Government, who accepted the friendly-settlement proposal. The information was forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to accept the friendly-settlement proposal. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letters dated 7 November 2013, 18 December 2013 and 6 February 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 20 February 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.

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.

FatoÅŸ Aracı George Nicolaou              Deputy Registrar President