Larina v. Russia

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 58060/08 by Marina Nikolayevna LARINA against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9 December 2010 as a Committee composed of:

Nina Vajić, President, Dean Spielmann, Giorgio Malinverni, judges, and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 3 October 2008,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The application was lodged by Ms Marina Nikolayevna Larina, a Russian national who was born in 1959 and lives in Elektrostal. 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 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 5 July 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the her observations had expired on 21 August 2009 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 August 2010. 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 Nina Vajić Deputy Registrar President