FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 29192/11 A.A. against Austria

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

Peer Lorenzen , President, Elisabeth Steiner , Khanlar Hajiyev , judges, and André Wampach , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 11 May 2011,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, A.A., is a Russian national, who was born in 1966 and lives in Vienna . The President granted the applicant ’ s request for his identity not to be disclosed to the public (Rule 47 § 3). He is represented before the Court by J. Ecker , a lawyer practising in Vienna .

The Austrian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Ambassador H. Tichy , Head of the International Law Department at the Federal Ministry for European and International Affairs.

The applicant came to Austria in 2001 with his wife. In 2004 he was extradited to the Russian Federation for criminal proceedings; he was convicted for membership in an armed group and human trafficking and sentenced to five years ’ imprisonment. The applicant claimed to have been ill-treated while in detention and after his release. Thereupon, he again left the Russian Federation in 2008 to join his wife and two children, born in 2002 and 2003, in Austria . The applicant lodged an asylum request in Austria which was dismissed in 2011.

Also in 2011 the applicant lodged a motion to be awarded a residence title which was dealt with in his favour in view of his actual family life in Austria and his high level of integration into Austrian society. An email of the Vienna Administrative Authority of 23 April 2012 confirmed that the authority planned to grant the residence title in respect to the applicant after the completion of the final procedural steps.

On 13 April 2012 the Vienna Federal Police Authority informed the applicant that his expulsion was planned to take place on 25 April 2012. The applicant was taken into detention with a view to expulsion.

On 24 April 2012 the applicant ’ s complaint under Article 8 was communicated to the respondent Government.

On 22 May 2012 the Government of the Russian Federation informed the Court that they did not wish to exercise their right to intervene in the case at this stage of the proceedings.

Further developments

On 15 May 2012 the applicant ’ s representative informed the Court that the applicant had been released from detention and had been granted a residence title in Austria .

On 21 May 2012 the Government submitted their observations and informed the Court that on 24 April 2012 the Vienna Administrative Authority had granted the applicant a resi dence title pursuant to section 41a § 9 of the Settlement and Residence Act ( Niederlassungs - und Aufenthalts ­ gesetz ) and had issued a corresponding identity card.

On 8 July 2012 the applicant ’ s representative confirmed that the applicant had no longer an interest to pursue the application and considered the matter to be resolved.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that his expulsion to the Russian Federation would subject him to a real risk of ill ‑ treatment because of the threats of further persecution due to his criminal conviction.

The applicant further complained under Article 8 that his expulsion to the Russian Federation would separate him from his wife and children.

THE LAW

The Court takes note of the observations and information received from the parties informing it of the fact that the applicant was granted a residence title in Austria .

The Court further acknowledges the fact that the applicant does no longer wish 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.

André Wampach Peer Lorenzen Deputy Registrar President