Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

MIRON v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

Doc ref: 10323/16 • ECHR ID: 001-225960

Document date: June 15, 2023

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 0

MIRON v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA

Doc ref: 10323/16 • ECHR ID: 001-225960

Document date: June 15, 2023

Cited paragraphs only

SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 10323/16 Tamara MIRON against the Republic of Moldova

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 15 June 2023 as a Committee composed of:

Frédéric Krenc , President , Diana Sârcu, Davor Derenčinović , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 February 2016,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Ms Tamara Miron, was born in 1955.

The applicant’s complaint under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the partial divestment of her retirement pension rights was communicated to the Moldovan Government (“the Government”).

In their submission as to the admissibility and merits of the case, the Government informed the Court that the applicant had managed to reopen domestic proceedings and had obtained (i) on 29 June 2016 the final judgment in her favour and (ii) on 8 September 2016 the inclusion of her statutory contributions for the period from 1983 to 1998 in the calculation of her pension rights.

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 8 February 2023, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 30 January 2023 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 an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The letter returned to the Court as the applicant had not claimed it from the post. No other address was communicated to the Court by the applicant.

THE LAW

Given the Government’s submissions and the lack of objections on the applicant’s part, the Court considers that the matter has been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (b) of the Convention, as a result of which the applicant may have lost interest in the case, and that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine .

Accordingly, the application should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Done in English and notified in writing on 6 July 2023.

Viktoriya Maradudina Frédéric Krenc Acting Deputy Registrar President

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2025

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 400211 • Paragraphs parsed: 44892118 • Citations processed 3448707