FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 32537/10 Milan Å UÅ NJAR against Croatia

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16 October 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Peer Lorenzen , President, Khanlar Hajiyev , Julia Laffranque , judges, and André Wampach , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 May 2010,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Milan Šušnjar , is a Croatian national, who was born in 1931 and lives in Plaški .

The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik .

The applicant ’ s complaints concerning access to court were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. In their observations The Government informed the Court that the applicant had died on 22 May 2010 and supported that claim with the relevant documents. 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 dated 26 April 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s widow was invited to indicate the applicant ’ s heir who would be willing to pursue the proceedings before the Court. Her 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 widow received this letter on 9 June 2012. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

The Court considers that, in these circumstances, It may be regarded that there is no person wishing to pursue the present 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.

André Wampach Peer Lorenzen Deputy Registrar President