BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Aleksandr Mikhaylovich POTSELUYEV v Russia - 39675/08 [2011] ECHR 543 (15 March 2011 URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/543.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 543 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
39675/08
Aleksandr Mikhaylovich POTSELUYEV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 15 March 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Christos
Rozakis,
President,
Anatoly
Kovler,
George
Nicolaou,
judges,
and
André Wampach, Deputy
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 June 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Aleksandr Mikhaylovich Potseluyev, a Russian national who was born in 1950 and lives in Novo-Kharitonovo, a village in the Moscow Region. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant’s complaint concerning a quashing of a binding judgment was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on its admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations.
As no reply was received to the Registry’s letter, 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.
On 11 January 2011 in a telephone conversation with the Registry the applicant informed the Court that the Government had satisfied his claim and that he had no intention to pursue his application.
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 Christos
Rozakis
Deputy Registrar President