FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 41157/05 Dušan ROZMAN against Slovenia

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 18 December 2012 as a Committee composed of:

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

Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 November 2005,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Dušan Rozman , is a Slovenian national, who was born in 1956 and lives in Ljubljana .

The Slovenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicant ’ s complaints concerning undue length of proceedings and lack of an effective remedy (Articles 6 and 13) were communicated to the Government, who informed the Court that the applicant had been offered a settlement proposal under section 25 of the Act on the Protection of the Right to a Trial without undue Delay (“the 2006 Act”). Subsequently, the applicant was requested to inform the Court whether a settlement had been reached and, if so, whether he intended to withdraw his application. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter dated 26 September 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was for the second time requested to provide the relevant information by 17 October 2012. 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 applicant received this letter on 5 October 2012. 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. 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 Ann Power-Forde Deputy Registrar President