FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 55294/07 Romanas Mykhaylovych SEMYON against Ukraine

The European Court of Human Rights ( Fifth Section ), sitting on 19 November 2013 as a Committee composed of:

Boštjan M. Zupančič, President, Ann Power-Forde, Helena Jäderblom, judges, and Stephen Phillips , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 December 2007 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Romanas Mykhaylovych Semyon , is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1970 and lives in Uzhgorod . He is a private entrepreneur.

The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr N. Kulchytskyy , from the Ministry of Justice.

The applicant complained under Article s 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the lengthy non-enforcement of the judgment of the Zakarpattya Regional Commercial Court of 30 May 2006 .

The applicant ’ s complaints concerning Article s 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention were communicated to the Government on 27 January 2010.

The last letter received from the applicant is dated 10 April 2008.

By letter dated 25 June 2013 , sent by registered post, the applicant was asked whether he wished to maintain h is application and was given until 19 July 2013 to reply. H is 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. On 8 July 2013 the applicant received that letter and h owever , n o 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. 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.

Stephen Phillips Boštjan M. Zupančič Deputy Registrar President