THIRD SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 41818/11 Anica DIEAC against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights ( Third Section ), sitting on 3 December 2013 as a Committee composed of:

Alvina Gyulumyan , President, Kristina Pardalos , Johannes Silvis, judges , and Marialena Tsirli , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 June 2011 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Ms Anica Dieac , is a Romanian national, who was born in 1940 and lives in Bac ă u . She was represented before the Court by Ms M. Amăriuței , a lawyer practising in Bac ă u .

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

The applicant ’ s complaint under Article 2 of the Convention concerning the death of her husband in a road accident 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 her own observations. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter s dated 18 September 2013 , sent by registered post, the applicant and her representative were notified that the period allowed for submission of observations had expired on 25 April 2013 and that no extension of time had been requested. The ir 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 received this letter on 26 September 2013 . The letter addressed to her representative was not collected from the post office. N o response has been received either from the applicant or from her representative .

THE LAW

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.

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