THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 73368/11 Jozef RABAJ against Slovakia

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 7 March 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Dragoljub Popović , President, Ján Šikuta , Iulia Antoanella Motoc , judges, and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 8 November 2011 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Jozef Rabaj , is a Slovak national, who was born in 1976 and habitually resides in Dolná Krupá .

The Government of the Slovak Republic (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms M. Piro šíková .

The applicant complained that the length of the proceedings in his request of 18 May 2010 for release from detention on remand had been incompatible with the “speediness” requirement under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention and that he had been denied any financial compensation in that respect.

On 11 July 2013 t he applicant ’ s complaint w as communicated to the Government under the provision invoked and, ex officio , also under Article 5 § 5 of the Convention. In that respect, the Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits .

Meanwhile, by letter of 19 July 2013, the applicant had been invited to appoint a lawyer to represent him in the proceedings before the Court and to submit, by 27 September 2013, a power of attorney to that effect.

By a letter of 4 November the applicant was informed that his request for legal aid of 16 October 2013 was incomplete. At the same time, he was asked to complete it and to appoint a lawyer by 18 November 2013.

By a registered letter of 25 November 2013 the applicant was informed that no reply had been received to the letter of 4 November 2013 and a copy of that letter was sent to him in case it had not reached him. A new time ‑ limit was set for 9 December 2013 and the applicant was informed that, if no reply was received by then, the Court might decide on the admissibility of the case on the basis of the file as it stood or, alternatively, conclude that the applicant was no longer interested in pursuing the application and, consequently, strike it out of its list of cases.

On 19 December 2013 the advice of receipt ( avis de réception ) returned to the Court by the postal service indicating that the registered letter of 25 November 2013 had been collected on 10 December 2013.

No reply has however been received from the applicant.

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 Dragoljub Popović Deputy Registrar President