THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 3562/11 Mihaly DEME against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 9 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 15 December 2010 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Mihaly Deme , is a Romanian national, who was born in 1981 and lives in Sfântu -Gheorghe. He was represented before the Court by Ms D. Cîcu , a lawyer practising in Codlea .

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

The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention in Codlea Prison . Under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention he complained about the length of his pre-trial detention.

The applicant ’ s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter s dated 5 July 2013 and 11 April 2014 respectively , sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 17 June 2013 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 these letter s on 15 July 2013 and 28 April 2014 respectively . 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. Furtherm ore, 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