KNEŽEVIĆ v. CROATIA
Doc ref: 3588/09 • ECHR ID: 001-114524
Document date: October 16, 2012
- Inbound citations: 0
- •
- Cited paragraphs: 0
- •
- Outbound citations: 0
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no . 3588/09 Jelka KNEŽEVIĆ against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 16 October 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen , President, Elisabeth Steiner , Julia Laffranque , judges, and André Wampach , Deputy Section Registrar ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 October 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Ms Jelka Knežević , is a Croatian national, who was born in 1930 and lives in Split .
The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms Š. Stažnik .
The applicant ’ s complaint concerning access to court 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 dated 4 May 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 9 March 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. 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 14 May 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 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.
André Wampach Peer Lorenzen Deputy Registrar President
LEXI - AI Legal Assistant
